Merry Christmas!

 Merry Christmas to everyone! 

The NCW in Saipan

 Below is a video clip from Better Catholics about the Neocatechumenal Way.  Those in the interview are from the Diocese of Chalan Kanoa. As stated by Father Jason, the Catholic Church is rich with many different charisms. The Way is part of that many riches in the Catholic Church.

The Rights of the Unborn

Surprisingly, the Guam Heartbeat Act (Bill 291-36) was passed by the 36th Guam Legislature.  The Guam Heartbeat Act aims to ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, or within about six weeks.  The bill made exceptions for medical emergencies or when it endangers the life or health of the mother.  Nevertheless, abortion has often been used as a birth control method rather than as a women's health care issue.  Statistics show that most abortion are done due to other factors other than medical reasons, rape, or incest.  Results in one study in the United States, dated 2005, stated:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents' or partners' desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.

It would be interesting to see the reasons why women in Guam chose to abort their child.  I do not think medical or health issue is the number one reason.  So, how is abortion about women's health care if the reason for aborting the child has nothing or little to do with health care?  I would hope Governor Lou Leon Guerrero, who is a nurse, would take this into account.  I know that she supports abortion, so it would not be surprising if she vetoed the bill.  Nevertheless, I can only hope and pray that Governor Lou Leon Guerrero would somehow be enlightened and pass the bill into law so that abortion can stop being used as a birth control method.  

 Furthermore, hoping that the Governor would sign the Heartbeat bill into law does not mean that I support abortion until a fetal heartbeat is detected.  Even the bill itself does not say that abortion is okay until a heartbeat is detected.  According to the Guam Heartbeat Bill:

§91B106. CONSTRUCTION OF CHAPTER. 

(a) This chapter does not create or recognize a right to abortion before a fetal heartbeat is detected

The main purpose of government is to protect individual rights.  This government has spoken out for the rights of women, homosexuals, and the LGBTQ+ community.  But what about the rights of the unborn?   

In this season of Christmas, let us remember that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary. He was in the virgin's womb for nine months.  Christ our savior was a person in Mary's womb.  Likewise, every pregnant woman carries a living person in her womb.  Every Christmas, our Catholic Churches in Guam are full of people, coming to celebrate the birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ.  As they celebrate our Lord's birthday, let us remember that every child in the womb is also a gift from God (Psalm 127:3).   

      

Freedom of Expression

  

The letter of Father Romeo Convocar, the Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Agana, can be found here for those who are interested in reading it. According to his letter: 

"The Catholic Church is often errantly criticized by those who say, "The church should stay out of political matters."  Rather, Catholics and other Christians are citizens of our beautiful country.  As citizens, the Church and its people have a right and responsibility to contribute to the common good of our society.  We help the common good of our communities by practicing our right to free speech and helping to shape public policy through dialogue and active community."

Many people often cite "Separation of Church and State" to silence the Church and to keep her out of political discussions.  However, the legal definition of "separation of Church and State" is: the separation of religion and government mandated under the establishment clause and the free exercise clause of the U.S. Constitution that forbids governmental establishment or preference of a religion and that preserves religious freedom from governmental intrusion.

Freedom of Expression is vital in our community, and the Church has a responsibility to transmit morality to the people for the salvation of souls.  There are four reasons why Freedom of expression is important in our society.  

1.  Individual development and human dignity.  It is important to our growth as a person to have the right to present our ideas and to consider other points of view. Our dignity as a person should be respected by allowing us the freedom to say what we think and to hear what others think.

2.  Advancement of knowledge.  It is easier for new discoveries to be made when ideas can be discussed freely.  Even if one disagrees with someone, that person may say something that helps one to test his/her knowledge and increase his/her understanding. 

3.  The maintenance of representative democracy.  Individual citizens participate in running our country through their power to vote for government officials and make choices about government policies.  In order to make wise choices, one would need to have good information.  Free expression never guaranteed complete or accurate information, but it increases the chances of getting such information.  The individual determines which and what information are accurate.  That cannot happen if free expression is suppressed, allowing individuals to hear only one side of the story.  

4.  Peaceful social change.  Free expression allows one to try to influence public opinion by persuasion without feeling you have to resort to violence to make changes.  

Therefore, Father Romeo was correct that the Church has a duty and responsibility to express her stance on the abortion issue.  In fact, the Church should come out more to catechize the faithful on the sanctity of life because many have been led astray on the abortion issue.  He and Archbishop Michael Byrnes are also correct in supporting the Guam Heartbeat bill, which does not contradict the teachings of the Church that human life begins at conception.  Whether the Guam Heartbeat bill passes or not is irrelevant and left in the hands of the Guam Legislature.  The important thing is that the Church be able to express herself, so that she can save souls by persuading some people into believing the sanctity of life.  If we are to change public policy, it starts first with winning the hearts of the people, which is done through free expression and proper catechesis.   

Carmen Hernandez Remembered for Virtues, Vices

The cause of the canonization of Carmen Hernandez was held on December 4th in Madrid, Spain.  At the event, Kiko shared his difficult relationship with Carmen as they worked together.  However, this kind of relationship can also be found in the Neocatechumenal Way communities.  According to Kiko, Carmen had always looked down on him until she saw the Bishop next to Kiko.  The article below can be found here. 

———————————————————————————————————

An ‘unbearable’ saint? Neocatechumenal Way’s Hernández remembered for virtues, vices

CNA Newsroom, Dec 6, 2022 / 14:30 pm

The diocesan phase of the cause for the canonization of Carmen Hernández, co-founder of the Neocatechumenal Way, was held in Madrid Dec. 4.  

At the ceremony, Kiko Argüello, who co-founded the movement with Hernandez and worked together with her for more than 50 years, shared some candid remarks about the difficulties of their relationship.

“The Lord united Carmen and me together for 52 years in a wonderful mission of evangelization,” Argüello said as he began his reflection on her life.

But their journey together wasn’t always easy, Argüello continued, departing from his text, describing the co-founder of these communities of Christian initiation as someone “unbearable.”

“I had a hard time accepting Carmen, until the Lord spoke within me that Carmen was … unbearable. Well, you all know her, right?” he said, to the smiles of many of those present.

“She was a not very likable woman from Soria [a town in Spain] and she told you the truth every time she saw you. She said: You’re part of the Cursillo, man. So, for her, being in the Cursillo was contemptible,” Argüello went on.

Getting back to his text, Argüello said that in reality God revealed to him that she was “a very great grace” and that he had placed him alongside her so that “she would tell me the truth.” And so Argüello was able to accept Hernández “as sent by the Lord.”

“I suffered until I realized that she came from God,” reiterated Argüello, who then lavished praise on her.

“Carmen was a stupendous woman, an extraordinary woman who did a lot of good not only for the members of the Neocatechumenal Way but [also] for the entire Church,” he said.

Hernández was “a masterful genius for freedom and love for the Church,” he said, and noted that he never flattered her.  

“She always told me the truth” and “was clearly aware that the mission God had given her was to support, defend, and correct me for the good of the Neocatechumenal Way,” Argüello acknowledged.

Consequently, outside of Church circles, she was not known because she “never sought prominence.”

The co-founder of the Neocatechumenal Way also highlighted that Hernández was “a true prophet, a true missionary, who lived the faith to a heroic degree. An exceptional woman, very important for the Church.”

‘She looked down on me’ until she saw the bishop

Argüello also told how Hernández didn’t have a high opinion of him when they met in the 1980s in the poor neighborhoods on the outskirts of Madrid.

He had felt a call from the Lord to live with the poor and social outcasts in the shantytowns of Palomeras Altas near Madrid.

“The providential presence of the archbishop of Madrid [Casimiro García Morcillo] who went to the shantytowns was what made Carmen definitively collaborate with me,” he recalled. “Until she saw the bishop in my shack, Carmen looked down on  me.”

“When she saw the bishop in my shack, from that moment on, she changed, as if to say: ‘The Church accepts Kiko.’ How difficult!” he exclaimed wryly.

“Carmen saw the presence of the Church in the archbishop and completely changed her attitude towards me. With the presence of Morcillo, she saw the promises that God had made to her in Israel come true,” he stressed.

Argüello recalled that the presence of Hernández in that place “was like a farm field that God had prepared to place within the Church. What God made us experience in the midst of a world of poverty, the Holy Spirit had already prepared for his entire Church.”

‘Thank you, Carmen’

Argüello concluded his reflection by saying that he hoped the canonization process serves to thoroughly examine the life of Hernández, “which was often a crucified, silent, and suffering life, like a dark night.”

So that “her virtues come to light, many of them hidden, many to a heroic degree,” he added.

Argüello said he was grateful “to have known her” and to have “been able to work with her in the hard work of the Gospel.”

Abortion Empowers Men

Abortion has been in our local news lately.  The reality behind abortion is that it empowers men over women and enslaves children. The modern slaves today are the children whose status is similar to those of the African slaves prior to the American Civil War.  Slaves were dehumanized and treated as objects., without any human rights  The unborn child is treated the same way. 

Abortion has always been disguised as "women's health care" or "women's equal rights."  Whenever abortion is discussed, very few people understand that abortion only empowers men over women.  It does not liberate women from anything.  In fact, it does the opposite.  In a society that allows women to choose not to become mothers, is it any wonder then why some men are choosing not to become fathers? How is it that feminists, the abortion industry, and the advocates of abortion rights get away with their claim that abortion liberates women? In truth, the availability of abortion has only served to liberate irresponsible men from duty, morality, and responsibility. And of course, the greater tragedy is the death of unborn children by the millions. 

The following article can be found here   

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Her choice, her problem: how abortion empowers men

This summer, President Obama proclaimed again that we "need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn't end at conception." In a sense, of course, he is absolutely right. But the problem is that, in another sense, he is completely wrong: Male responsibility really does end at conception. Men these days can choose only sex, not fatherhood; mothers alone determine whether children shall be allowed to exist. Legalized abortion was supposed to grant enormous freedom to women, but it has had the perverse result of freeing men and trapping women.

The likelihood of this cultural development was foreseen by the radical feminist Catherine MacKinnon, one of the critical voices responding to Roe v. Wade's extension of the right of privacy to cover abortion. In an essay called "Privacy vs. Equality," MacKinnon argued that "abortion's proponents and opponents share a tacit assumption that women do significantly control sex. Feminist investigations suggest otherwise. Sexual intercourse ... cannot simply be presumed coequally determined." Indeed, she added, "men control sexuality," and "Roe does not contradict this."

"Abortion facilitates women's heterosexual availability," MacKinnon pointed out: "In other words, under conditions of gender inequality [abortion] does not liberate women; it frees male sexual aggression. The availability of abortion removes the one remaining legitimized reason that women have had for refusing sex besides the headache." Perhaps that is why, she observed, "the Playboy Foundation has supported abortion rights from day one." In the end, MacKinnon pronounced, Roe's "right to privacy looks like an injury got up as a gift," for "virtually every ounce of control that women won" from legalized abortion "has gone directly into the hands of men."

At the time, MacKinnon's work may have seemed little more than a curiosity on the left, but, as the years have passed, some of the essay's claims have proved prescient. I recall a law student who would admit when pressed, "I'm in favor of keeping abortion legal because I don't like using condoms." Since abortion could now come between conception and birth, he saw no benefit to missing any portion of sexual pleasure, even though it imposed a risk of surgery on his partner. He may have assumed a rational partner would choose abortion either freely or under pressure. With less deliberate callousness, under the influence of passion almost any male may think quite simply: "At least there's a way out if the unlikely happens and pregnancy occurs."

I've also met a clever female undergraduate student living with her boyfriend, who thought she had solved this problem. When I asked whether she was for or against abortion, she answered: "I'm pro-choice, but you can bet I tell him I'm pro-life!" She reasoned that, in light of her warning, he would be careful not to fool around in ways that could lead to pregnancy.

Such a lie may not provide protection for every young woman in her situation, however. If she says she is pro-life so that he thinks abortion is not an option for her, he might decide to keep her from getting pregnant by leaving her for someone more open to abortion, a woman who doesn't insist on his using a condom. That is, the presence in the sexual marketplace of women willing to have an abortion reduces an individual woman's bargaining power. As a result, in order not to lose her guy, she may be pressured into doing precisely what she doesn't want to do: have unprotected sex, then an unwanted pregnancy, then the abortion she had all along been trying to avoid. Even though her abortion in this case is not literally forced, it would be, in an important sense, imposed on her. And, far from alleviating her overall situation, it would merely return her to the same sexual pressures, made worse by a new assurance to her boyfriend that she is willing to take care of a pregnancy.

Perhaps it was difficult to foresee such cultural trends back in 1973, when Roe v. Wade was handed down by the Supreme Court. But they simply track the inner logic of choice and the market. Economists have shown that such scenarios have in fact become common since abortion was legalized in the United States. Easy access to abortion has increased the expectation and frequency of sexual intercourse (including unprotected intercourse) among young people, making it more difficult for a woman to deny herself to a man without losing him, thus increasing pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. (See, for instance, Jonathan Klick and Thomas Stratmann's 2003 study, "The Effect of Abortion Legalization on Sexual Behavior," in the Journal of Legal Studies.)

Furthermore, if a woman attempts to choose birth instead of abortion, she may well find the child's father pushing the other way. Her boyfriend's fear of fatherhood would once have been focused on intercourse itself and could have led him either to be careful to avoid conception or else (overcoming that fear) to commit himself beforehand to equal responsibility for the child. His fear now will turn to getting her to choose abortion. One investigator, Vincent M. Rue, reported in the Medical Science Monitor, that 64 percent of American women who abort feel pressed to do so by others. Another, Frederica Mathewes-Green in her book Real Choices, discovered that American women almost always abort to satisfy the desires of people who do not want to care for their children.

Catherine MacKinnon seemed to suggest that abortion leads to greater male sexual aggression only "under conditions of gender inequality," which implies more equality for women could reduce the male exploitation caused by Roe v. Wade. That makes sense in theory. To the degree that individual women are economically, educationally, and in other ways empowered, they should be more able to stand up to male pressures to have unwanted sex (and to have unwanted abortions in order to give the guys still more unwanted sex).

But counteracting the negative forces of sexual competition is difficult. Even if women were universally to agree to refuse sex without condoms, for example, enforcement of this agreement in such an intimate sphere would be nearly impossible. Women would always be tempted to increase their individual sexual competitiveness by consenting to sex without a condom, while relying on abortion as a backup, thus causing female solidarity and power to collapse. Only women strong enough to forgo boyfriends altogether might be likely in the end to resist.

Furthermore, if MacKinnon is right, wherever women have not yet overcome gender inequality, involuntary sex and involuntary abortion will tend to be more frequent, precisely as a result of abortion's availability. To the degree that a culture is built on machismo, for example, the legalization of abortion will make women relatively worse off by giving men another tool to manipulate women as sex objects. Again, to the degree that an economy employs mainly men, leaving women dependent on economic handouts, women will be much less likely to resist male pressures to make use of abortion. Wherever men make women's decisions for them, the option of abortion will be a man's choice, regardless of how the law may label it.

Human-rights activists in developing nations must learn to consider this fact. In those countries, only a thin, elite layer of truly independent and powerful women may be relatively unharmed by the availability of abortion, because only for them is the abortion option more nearly their own. Proclaiming a right to abortion in developing countries may mean just adopting the viewpoint of these well-to-do professionals--which ought to be no surprise. Those elites are often the only voices for women heard in the transnational political arenas where abortion is debated.

Moreover, the availability of abortion may make all societies less open to empowering women in other ways. MacKinnon may well be right that stronger women would more often resist male pressures to risk pregnancies and have abortions. But, perhaps paradoxically, the option of abortion actually makes sympathy and solidarity--and thus women's empowerment--less likely.

When birth was the result of passion and bad luck, some people could sympathize with a young woman who was going to need help with her baby, though the stigma of bastardry was genuine. If money or a larger place to live were going to be necessary for her to stay in school, a sense of solidarity would likely lead friends and family to offer assistance. The father would feel strong pressure as well, for he was as responsible as she for the child. He might offer to get a second job or otherwise shoulder some of the burdens of parenting.

But once continuing a pregnancy to birth is the result neither of passion nor of luck but only of her deliberate choice, sympathy weakens. After all, the pregnant woman can avoid all her problems by choosing abortion. So if she decides to take those difficulties on, she must think she can handle them.

Birth itself may be followed by blame rather than support. Since only the mother has the right to decide whether to let the child be born, the father may easily conclude that she bears sole responsibility for caring for the child. The baby is her fault.

It may also seem unfair to him that she could escape motherhood (by being legally allowed to prevent birth), while he is denied any way to escape fatherhood (by still being legally required to pay child support). If consenting to sex does not entail consenting to act as a mother, why should it entail consenting to act as a father? Paternity support in this context appears unjust, and he may resist compliance with his legal duties.

Prior to the legalization of abortion in the United States, it was commonly understood that a man should offer a woman marriage in case of pregnancy, and many did so. But with the legalization of abortion, men started to feel that they were not responsible for the birth of children and consequently not under any obligation to marry. In gaining the option of abortion, many women have lost the option of marriage. Liberal abortion laws have thus considerably increased the number of families headed by a single mother, resulting in what some economists call the "feminization of poverty."

The mother is even worse off if, during pregnancy, tests show that the child will have a disability: Doctors often press for abortion, in order to be sure that she does not later blame and sue them for the costs of raising her child. Some have suggested that health-care plans should provide no postbirth coverage for a handicapped child whose mother refuses a paid abortion. If she does not abort, after all, she will be causally responsible for the costs and the alleged burdens that the child brings. Even her friends and neighbors may make her feel ashamed for not choosing to abort her child.

Employers may likewise react negatively to maternal needs where abortion has been available. If they (or the state) pay for abortions, they may feel less obligated to shape labor practices to the needs of mothers. If maternity causes problems with work routines or job schedules, the employer may well consider these to be private or personal problems that female employees brought on themselves. The availability of abortion makes women's claims for better working conditions lose a measure of legitimacy.

Throughout human history, children have been the consequence of natural sexual relations between men and women. Both sexes knew they were equally responsible for their children, and society had somehow to facilitate their upbringing. Even the advent of birth control did not fundamentally change this dynamic, for all forms of contraception are fallible.

Elective abortion changes everything. Abortion absolutely prevents the birth of a child. A woman's choice for or against abortion breaks the causal link between conception and birth. It matters little what or who caused conception or whether the male insisted on having unprotected intercourse. It is she alone who finally decides whether the child comes into the world. She is the responsible one. For the first time in history, the father and the doctor and the health-insurance actuary can point a finger at her as the person who allowed an inconvenient human being to come into the world. The deepest tragedy may be that there is no way out.

By granting to the pregnant woman an unrestrained choice over who will be born, we make her alone to blame for how she exercises her power. Nothing can alter the solidarity-shattering impact of the abortion option.

Richard Stith teaches at Valparaiso University School of Law in Indiana.

Stith, Richard

Opening Ceremony of Beatification for Carmen Hernandez

 The following is the video of the opening ceremony of Beatification of Carmen Hernández, which can be found in YouTube. The video is long but worth watching.

Papal Nuncio Praises RMS

 The following article can be found here.

——————————————————————————

Papal Nuncio Praises Redemptoris Mater Seminary For Its Work

DANBURY—Redemptoris Mater Diocesan Missionary Seminary honored Archbishop Christophe Pierre, the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States on Sunday, who praised them for forming men who will go out as missionary disciples in the name of Christ to a world in need of evangelization.

More than 400 people attended the 5th Annual Gala Dinner, which recognized Archbishop Pierre, along with James Larkin, retired vice chairman of American Express International.

“The Church needs missionary disciples,” Archbishop Pierre said. “Missionary activity is one of the greatest challenges facing us today. Those of you who support the Neocatechumenal Way are doing a vital mission for the future of the Church.”

The Redemptoris Mater Seminary is under the direction of rector Father Marco Pacciana, along with Father Giandomenico Flora, spiritual director. Redemptoris Mater (Mother of the Redeemer) seminaries are under the auspices of the Neocatechumenal Way, a 55-year-old charism in the Church dedicated to Christian formation and the New Evangelization. The seminaries form men as missionary diocesan priests to serve the local church or in any part of the world the bishop chooses.

The seminary in Stamford was established in 2015 on the Feast of Immaculate Conception through the efforts of Bishop Frank J. Caggiano. Several years ago, Archbishop Leonard P. Blair of the Archdiocese of Hartford asked for a section of the seminary to prepare men for vocations in the archdiocese, Father Pacciana said.

Bishop Caggiano, in his opening prayer at the gala, which was held at The Amber Room Colonnade in Danbury, praised the seminarians, and said that one day “We hope to see them ordained to be your sacred priests.”  The Church needs missionary disciples,” Archbishop Pierre said. “Missionary activity is one of the greatest challenges facing us today. Those of you who support the Neocatechumenal Way are doing a vital mission for the future of the Church.”

The Redemptoris Mater Seminary is under the direction of rector Father Marco Pacciana, along with Father Giandomenico Flora, spiritual director. Redemptoris Mater (Mother of the Redeemer) seminaries are under the auspices of the Neocatechumenal Way, a 55-year-old charism in the Church dedicated to Christian formation and the New Evangelization. The seminaries form men as missionary diocesan priests to serve the local church or in any part of the world the bishop chooses.

The seminary in Stamford was established in 2015 on the Feast of Immaculate Conception through the efforts of Bishop Frank J. Caggiano. Several years ago, Archbishop Leonard P. Blair of the Archdiocese of Hartford asked for a section of the seminary to prepare men for vocations in the archdiocese, Father Pacciana said.

Bishop Caggiano, in his opening prayer at the gala, which was held at The Amber Room Colonnade in Danbury, praised the seminarians, and said that one day “We hope to see them ordained to be your sacred priests.”

Father Pacciana expressed his gratitude and said, “I am very happy and grateful for all of you coming tonight for your support.” He said the seminary has had many milestones over the past year, including the ordination of one of the original seminarians, Ricardo Batista Comim, to the transitional diaconate.

In his comments, Archbishop Pierre praised the seminary for its work forming men to be priests who are missionary disciples, who “shine like diamonds among the people of God.”

He said true missionary priests must have the ability to see where mercy is needed and bring a “healthy zeal” to their vocation so they can share the healing power of God’s mercy with others.

He said Redemptoris Mater produces men who give themselves to the Lord and their flock by bringing the joy of the Gospel to the world…and they must be willing to go out into the world.

“It is easier to stay home surrounded by those who love us, but this is not Jesus’ way—he does not use half measures,” the archbishop said. “He gives his disciples one word: Go.” It is “a powerful word that resonates in every cranny of missionary life.”

The men, he said, “must be in a permanent state of mission” and understand the territory of their mission—and their territory is the Diocese of Bridgeport and the Archdiocese of Hartford. He said, “This territory has a rich Catholic history and tradition, and it is still a missionary territory for those who have fallen away and who are on the margins of society.”

In order to announce Christ, the men must be “free of worldly attachments, and at Redemptoris Mater, seminarians learn to renounce the things of the world and develop an understanding of the beauty of freedom that only following Christ can give.”

Father Pacciana gave him a silver plaque and thanked him for his message and support. He also thanked James Larkin, who could not attend the gala, for his commitment to the seminary and the Church.

“The Nuncio is very supportive of the work of the Neocatecumenal Way and the Redemptoris Mater Seminaries in the USA,” Father Pacciana said later. “This dinner conveyed an atmosphere of joy and communion. People came from the tristate area and also from Pennsylvania and Massachusetts to support the seminarians, but we were all together as one family, the family of the children of God, to celebrate and to support these men.” He said that most of the people at the gala rediscovered their baptism through the itinerary of Christian initiation that is the Neocatecumenal Way.

“Many of these were brothers and sisters from the communities where these seminarians too are rediscovering their baptism, and it is from this itinerary that their vocations come, and through this itinerary they are nourished and strengthened,” he said.

Father thanked Archbishop Pierre for attending and “showing with his presence the love and support of the Holy Father for the work of the Neocatecumenal Way and the Redemptoris Mater Seminaries.”

He said the archbishop presided over a vocational meeting in Gettysburg last July attended by more than 10,000 brothers and sisters from the Neocatecumenal Way, and “he saw firsthand the work of the Lord in their life, when young men, young women and entire families answered the call to become priests, nuns or to leave as a family for the mission to evangelize everywhere in the world.”

Father Pacciana also thanked Bishop Caggiano.

“He has honored us with his presence and is the man without whom none of this would have been possible in our diocese,” Father said. “Because of his great prophetic vision, we saw the opening of this seminary, which is an answer to the crisis of vocations and the larger crisis of faith our Church is going through.”

He thanked Archbishop Blair, “who had the same vision when a few years ago decided to open a section of our seminary for the formation of vocations for the Archdiocese of Hartford.” He thanked Bishop Juan M. Betancourt of the Archdiocese for his support and “the great work he is doing in fostering vocations in the Archdiocese of Hartford,” and Bishop James Massa, “who has always accompanied and supported us, both as auxiliary bishop of Brooklyn and as rector of St. Joseph’s Seminary in Yonkers, where these men study theology.”

He praised everyone involved in making this year’s gala a success and say next year’s dinner will be held on June 4.

In his final comments, Bishop Caggiano thanked Archbishop Pierre for his great witness to the United States, and he praised the seminarians: “These men, each in their own unique way, are very much committed. They are surrendering themselves to the hands of the Lord and will one day be our shepherds and missionary disciples. The Church will be in very good hands with these young men. I know them and I live with them.”

In offering the final blessing, Archbishop Blair said, “Lord, we are privileged to be together and celebrate as one on this feast of Corpus Christi, the great Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ.” He said the Blessed Virgin, who is the Mother of the Eucharist, is the patron of the Redemptoris Mater Seminaries (Mother of the Redeemer) and that the seminarians have all the help they need through the prayers of the Mother of God.

Archbishop Christophe Pierre was ordained on April 5, 1970, in Saint-Malo, France and incardinated in the Archdiocese of Rennes. He was parochial vicar of St. Peter and St. Paul Parish in Colombes, Diocese of Nanterre, France.

He has a master’s degree in Sacred Theology and a doctorate in Canon Law from the Pontifical Lateran University, Rome. He completed his studies at the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy in Rome and started his service in the Diplomatic Corps of the Holy See on March 5, 1977. He was appointed first to the Pontifical Representation in New Zealand and the Islands of the Pacific Ocean. Subsequently, he served in Mozambique, in Zimbabwe, in Cuba, in Brazil, and at the Permanent Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland.

He was elected Titular Archbishop of Gunela on July 12, 1995 and received the Episcopal Consecration on September 24, 1995, in Saint-Malo, France.

Archbishop Pierre was appointed apostolic nuncio to Haiti in 1995, where he served until 1999. He has been the Apostolic Nuncio to Uganda and then to Mexico. He was appointed apostolic nuncio of the United States by Pope Francis on April 12, 2016.

Honoree James Larkin is a 50-year parishioner of St. Mary Church in Greenwich,  a graduate of the College of the Holy Cross and Wharton Graduate School.  He and his wife Dr. Susan Larkin, who is an art historian, have two children and seven grandchildren.

A Korean War veteran, he served two tours of duty as a Marine Corps infantry officer in Korea, Japan and the U.S. and was discharged as a captain.

He spent 40 years in the international communications and financial services fields. His 12 years with American Broadcasting Company were comprised of cooperative liaison with the government’s counter-Castro undertakings in Central and South America. He retired as vice chairman of American Express International after previously serving as president, Europe, Middle East and Africa for the company.

Since 1992, he has been a supporter, contributor and collaborator in the international Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. In 1994, he was an Ecumenical Patriarchate delegate to the peace conference on Bosnia-Herzegovina in Istanbul.  In 2000, he was the first American Catholic to be awarded the Cross of St. Andrew by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in Istanbul and is Archon of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.  He also received a citation from the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut for building unity between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches.

Advent Announcement #2

First of all, I will say this once again as a reminder that this is MY blog, which reflects only my opinions, viewpoints, and experiences. Although I walk in the Way, I am not a spokesperson for the Way. The Neocatechumenal Way has its own official website. 

In my previous post on Advent Announcement, I wrote that we had a couple of good news.  The first one pertained to Carmen Hernandez.  The second one is in regards to the Nuncio calling a meeting for all the bishops in the United States.  This meeting will take place soon.

The purpose of the meeting is to clear up any misconceptions about the Neocatechumenal Way.  As many people are aware, there are some bishops who oppose the Way because they listened and believed social media more than the Church and the Pope.  The Nuncio will explain to all the bishops that the Way is approved by the Church, is part of the Church, and endorsed by five popes.  There should no moratorium to stop the Way from evangelizing or building more communities.  In fact, every baptized Catholic is called to evangelize.  Evangelization is part of building up the Church.

Correcting the misconceptions of the bishops is the first way to go.  Then the priest and deacon can follow their bishop.  Unfortunately, obedience to the bishop is a problem we had in Guam under then Archbishop Anthony Apuron.  Some of the priests whom he ordained went against him and even encouraged the laity to go against the Archbishop.  The laity should never entice a priest to go against their bishop's decree, and a priest should never band together the laity to go against a bishop. A priest should never go against their bishop's decree.  Canon law 273 states, "Clerics are bound by a special obligation to show reverence and obedience to the Supreme Pontiff and their own ordinary."  The ordinary in this case would be their bishop or Archbishop. 

Padre Pio was a perfect example of obedience despite the unjust things done to him by the Church. He was banned from celebrating Mass publicly. The superior of the monastery read to Padre Pio the decree, and he responded, "God's will be done.....The will of the superiors is the will of God."  When people came out in defense of Padre Pio, the Saint responded, "I must repeat that I am very disgusted by the unworthy behavior of certain false prophet who speak in my behalf..... they should stop this false and unworthy propaganda, but meanwhile they have followed in their morbid fanaticism,  not caring about the Supreme authority of the Church. I turn, therefore,  as a son most humble and completely obedient to the Catholic Church....." 

The accusations against Padre Pio later proved to be false, and he would eventually be allowed to minister without restrictions.  The point is that Padre Pio submitted to the decree and remained silent, trusting in God’s provident plan. A priest has promised obedience to his bishop.

According to the Arlington Catholic Herald:

This experience gave me a foretaste of what priestly obedience implies. In the rite of ordination, both deacons and priests promise their respect and obedience to the bishop. As the ordinand kneels, he places his folded hands into the hands of his bishop, signifying his fidelity to the bishop and his successors. Through this symbolic action, the priest or deacon is ultimately placing his own will in the hands of God through the hands of the successor to the Apostles.

This promise of obedience implies — and requires — the exercise of two virtues: trust and love. I express my trust and love for God by surrendering my will to his through the mediation of my bishop. By trusting my bishop, I recognize that his decisions are made for my own good and the good of the church. In the same vein, I strive to embrace his decisions out of love for Christ and the church, putting their good above my own.

My Rome experience led me to reflect on the role of obedience in the life of a priest. While it may appear that obedience hinders a priest’s free will, it actually offers an occasion for him to conform his life more closely to Jesus Christ. When a priest offers himself obediently to his bishop, he imitates Jesus’ own obedience that he offered the Father in all his actions here on earth. He freely chose this out of love for his Father and us, and trust in his will. When I meditate on what he went through on behalf of all of us, suddenly my challenges do not seem as difficult.

So, all the bishops of the United States will soon be called into a meeting to clear up all and any misconceptions of the Neocatechumenal Way, so that whatever restrictions, moratorium, or unjust decrees against the Way will be rescinded. First, the bishop must be in communion with the Pope.  When the Bishops of the Church are in communion with the Pope, then it will soon follow that priests, deacons, and the laity will also be in communion.  

Happy Thanksgiving!

 

Advent Announcement

 We received a couple of good news in last night's Advent Announcement.  The first good news is that Carmen Hernandez will be declared the title "Servant of God" by the Vatican on December 4, 2022.  She is getting closer to the canonization of sainthood.  You can find the information here. 

On July 19, 2021, after the five years established by the current legislation, the petition for the opening of the Cause of Canonization of Carmen Hernández, initiator together with Kiko Argüello, of the Neocatechumenal Way, was presented to the Archbishop of Madrid, Cardinal D. Carlos Osoro.

After a preliminary investigation to verify the presence of a solid, spontaneous and well extended reputation of sanctity and of signs, by the diocesan tribunal; after also having made the pertinent canonical consultations with the Dicastery of the Causes of Saints of the Holy See, with the bishops of the ecclesiastical Province and with the faithful of this Diocese, the Archbishop of Madrid, D. Carlos Osoro, has accepted this request and will preside over the “Official Opening of the Cause of Beatification and Canonization of Carmen Hernández Barrera”.

This joyful ecclesial event will take place on December 4, 2022, the second Sunday of Advent, at 6:00 p.m., at the Francisco de Vitoria University in Madrid.

Those invited include the communities lead by Kiko, Fr. Mario and Ascensión in Italy, Spain and France, all the itinerant catechists of the first teams of the nations, all the rectors and vice-rectors of the Redemptoris Mater seminaries of the world and the ordained priests of the seminaries of Rome and Madrid.

The Root of the Problem

 An anonymous poster brought up an interesting remark.  He/She stated: 

AnonymousNovember 19, 2022 at 8:13 AM  

Jane Doe, you got that right! We see that in the US where conservative speech are being censored while hate speech from liberals are being tolerated. All this nonsense comes from somewhere, and my guess are the colleges taken over by liberals

 I agree.  People in our society did not simply wake up one day and decide that Donald Trump is the epitome of systematic racism and should not run for President of the United States.  Members of BLM, ANTIFA, and some members of the Democratic Party were brainwashed into thinking this way.  They did not simply wake up one day and say, "Okay!  Enough is enough!  Donald Trump is a racist and is the very epitome of systematic racism in America because he is against immigration."  Trump has always stated that he is against ILLEGLAL immigration.  He is not opposed to immigrants who enter the United States legally.

Hatred is taught.  It is not something a child is born with.  And unfortunately, in many of America's universities, Socialism and Marxism are promoted while traditional conservative values are being suppressed.  Universities and probably even high schools are where these ideologies are being taught.  There is always a root cause of where all this hatred is coming from. Is this not the reason why the LGBTQ+ community are promoting the teachings (or should I say "indoctrination") of Critical Race Theory into the elementary schools, where children are most impressionable. The video below points out the problem that America is facing in some of its universities.  When a person or an institution demonizes and persecutes another person (in this case Trump) or a group of people (in this case the MAGA crowd who voted for Trump), they are simply causing division and hatred. Disagreeing with a person is not hate speech nor violence.  Apparently, some of the educational system in America needs to be revamped to foster civil dialogue and learn the difference between speech and violence.  

 

My Opinion of Donald Trump

 Donald Trump is one of the greatest Presidents of the United States.  He has indeed accomplished a lot during his one-term as President.  However, not everyone likes his personality or his character.  He is arrogant and has a lot of pride.  Recently, he made negative remarks of the Governor of Florida and the Governor of Virginia, both of whom are Republicans.  Both Governors recognize Trump’s achievements and understood that his policies worked for the country.  Trump has also announced that he will be running again as President of the U.S. in 2024. One of my friends supports Trump and would vote for him again in 2024.  That friend asked my opinion of him.  This is my opinion:

While he was President, his policies were a benefit to the country, and he did put America first. Unfortunately, his arrogance has earned him a lot of enemies including among those of his own party. Saying negative remarks about Ron De Santis and Glenn Youngkin is not going to get him re-elected by the people of Florida and Virginia. Nevertheless, Trump seems to have a lot of affect on his enemies that they cannot forget him and continue to persecute him to this day.  If Trump were elected in 2024, he can continue to do great things for America, but I do not think he can unify the American people.  There are people whose hatred of him runs so deep that they have become so obsessed with seeking his downfall regardless of the good things he has done. 

With that said, I am sure that there are many Donald Trumps out there. In fact, I know one person in my community who have the same personality.  Yet, is this not the reason why we walk in a community and attend Mass....to put out the old man and allow the new man to emerge in us?  I can say for certain that my brother in my community have changed a great deal that I do not see much arrogance in the brother. Then again, could it be that I changed and have learned to accept the brother’s character? Perhaps, we both changed in our walk, but one thing is for certain, we are still struggling with pride.  Is this not true with many people regardless of whether they are in the NCW or not?  Pride is the worst of the deadliest sins.  No one can change Trump’s attitude and personality.  That is up to him to change, and he can change with God’s grace. In the same way, Trump cannot change his enemies’ hatred of him.  

WYD Lisbon, Portugal

The 2023 World Youth Day will be in Lisbon, Portugal. The NCW in Guam is preparing our Guam youth to participate in the World Youth Day next year. 😀 

Who Is Responsible?

 In the Guam Daily Post, Guam Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood ordered the attorneys representing the Holy See to ask Pope Francis if he can resolve the Guam clergy sex abuse case rather than settling it in court.  The case comes from a lawsuit filed by "D.M." who accused the Vatican of being responsible for former Archbishop Anthony Apuron for sexually assaulting him in the 1990s while he was a student of Father Duenas Memorial School.  My first question is how was the Vatican responsible for the sexual assault of D.M.?  D.M. kept the sexual assault to himself. He never told his parents about it nor did he report it to the police or school principal.  So, how was the Pope responsible?  Did D.M. expect the Pope to read his mind?  The accusation lacks any grounds.  On the other hand, D.M. has a responsibility to report the crime himself, which he failed to do. At the very least, he should have reported it to his parents. 

There was only one such report in Guam of a priest who was accused of child sexual abuse. A victim did come forward and reported Father Brouillard to the Guam Police Department. According to my blog post, dated July 19, 2019: 

And, a self-described, 30 year veteran of the Guam police force, who called into my radio show, stated that he had arrested a Catholic priest who molested a young alter boy on Guam. He stated that after his arrest, the priest admitted to molesting multiple victims on Guam.

According to the retired police officer, this entire incident was covered up by former Archbishop Flores. The alleged offending priest was, according to the retired officer, promptly shipped off-island shortly after his arrest, and never faced justice on Guam. 

 

So, did the Guam Police Department make any effort in getting Father Brouillard back into Guam for prosecution?  Here, we have a very brave young man who reported the sexual abuse to the police many years ago.  Brouillard also admitted that he molested multiple victims when he was arrested by GPD. So, did GPD contact any of those victims to add more charges to the priest?  So many unanswered questions. This negligence is also found in Pornchai's story when he reported his sexual abuse to a school counselor and other authorities. His story was ignored, and his step father, Richard Baily, continued to abuse him and his brother.  If the school counselor and other authorities whom Pornchai reported the abuse had done their job, Richard Baily would have been in jail and Pornchai's mother would most likely be alive today.  Had GPD and other authorities had done their job, Father Brouillard would have been prosecuted and in prison, which would stop any further sexual abuse of boys done by this priest. 

According to Father Gordon's post in his blog, which I previously published, it says that Guam has 103 cold cases.  One of those cold cases involved Pornchai's mother, Wannee Baily.  Attorney Clair Farr has reached out to the District Attorney in Maine.  As a result, an investigation was opened, and Richard Alan Bailey was arrested, found guilty, and imprisoned for child sexual assault.  This same attorney also reached out to law enforcement in Guam and to the Attorney General's office regarding the cold case of Wannee Baily.  There appears to be evidence that Richard Baily also murdered his wife. Richard Baily is charged with child sexual abuse.  He could be charged with the murder of his wife, but there was no response from the Chief of Police and the Attorney General's office in Guam when Attorney Clair Farr contacted them.  Again, another embarrassment for Guam.

It should also be noted that the large majority of child sexual abuse done in Guam occurs OUTSIDE the Catholic Church.  Just look at the newspaper headlines.  Where is the outrage of the people when child sexual abuse are being carried out by family members and friends inside the home?  These family members and/or friends are being brought through the justice system, and there are no picket signs declaring them guilty without a trial.  On the other hand, people came out declaring priests (most of whom have been dead for a long time) guilty without the due process of a trial.   

Getting Away with Murder on Guam

 The following article was written on Father Gordon's blog, and it pertains to Guam.  You can find the article here.  This is an embarrassment to our law enforcement agency.

----------------------‐--------------------------------------------------

Getting Away with Murder on the Island of Guam

Sep 14 

Written By Fr. Gordon J. MacRae

The

Sep 14 

Written By Fr. Gordon J. MacRae

The U.S. Territorial Island of Guam; has 103 unsolved cold case homicides. The victim in Case No. 70 was the mother of Pornchai Moontri and it needs a new set of eyes.

September 14, 2022 by Fr. Gordon MacRae

Important Note from Father MacRae: It has not escaped my notice that this is being posted on the Feast of the Exultation of the Cross. That is most fitting. This is an unusual post for us, but a necessary one. It tells a story that has deeply impacted our lives and it has been a long time in the making. Please note that portions of this account may be disturbing. I have done all I can to minimize such content without minimizing the story itself. This post is longer than most, but it is a mesmerizing account with no part that I could justly omit. If you have never shared a post of mine on social media or with others, please share this one.

+ + +

The Island of Guam, which at 212 square miles is the largest of the Mariana Islands in the Western Pacific, is today home to about 170,000 people. About 80% are indigenous Chamorro or of Filipino or other Pacific Islands descent. Guam also hosts one of the most strategic U.S. military bases in the Pacific, Andersen Air Force Base. In 1950, United States citizenship was conferred upon all permanent residents of this unincorporated U.S. territorial island.

As in the rest of the U.S., the citizens of Guam elect their Executive and Legislative branches of government. Guam has a federal judiciary appointed by the U.S. president, and superior court judges and an Attorney General appointed by the governor. Guam also has a phenomenon plaguing its law enforcement system. Writing for the Guam Daily Post (November 7, 2021) reporter Nick Delgado penned an article about the extraordinary number of Guam’s unsolved ‘cold case’ homicides.

One of these unsolved cases, number 70 on a list of 103, is that of Wannee Laporn Bailey, the mother of Pornchai Moontri. She was murdered in Guam at age 47 on April 18, 2000. I first wrote of this in “Human Trafficking: Thailand to America and a Cold Case in Guam,” an article that lays out the back story of Pornchai’s life before being sent to prison at age 18.

Earlier articles that I wrote about Pornchai’s life garnered some attention from around the world, including from some who had formed erroneous conclusions about him and his offense. What I wrote gave context to a nagging gap in his 1993 trial. That gap was the six years between his arrival in the United States at age 12 and the offense that sent him to prison at age 18.

After reading my articles, Clare Farr, a Trademarks attorney with an Intellectual Property law firm in Western Australia, alerted police and the District Attorney in Maine that something essential was amiss in Pornchai’s trial: an account of six years of trauma prior to his crime. A detective and an Assistant District Attorney then went to interview Pornchai 26 years into his prison sentence.

Then they interviewed Pornchai’s brother, Priwan, two years older. These interviews, now heavily corroborated, resulted in a 2017 warrant for the arrest of Richard Alan Bailey at his Westlake, Oregon home. He was indicted on 40 felony counts of gross sexual assault, charges in which Pornchai and his brother, Priwan, were victims as young immigrant children transported from rural Thailand to the city of Bangor, Maine in 1985. A long held and highly destructive secret thus ascended into the light.

Richard Bailey Brought to Justice — Sort Of

On September 12, 2018, Richard Alan Bailey entered a plea of “no contest” but was found guilty in a Maine Court on all 40 felony sexual assault charges. A testament to the nature of these proceedings was that of Pornchai himself whose testimony was read into the court record by Assistant District Attorney Alice Clifford:

“Your Honor, Richard [Bailey’s] actions have had a catastrophic impact on me, and I believe it is important for the Court to understand this in the context of my life history. I am an inmate of New Hampshire Prison for Men. I am in prison because when I was only 18, I killed a man and I have been in custody ever since. In 1993, I was sentenced to a term of 45 years in prison. I am now 46 years of age and have spent 60 percent of my life in prison.

“What Richard [Bailey] did to me began when I was only 12-years-old. The few years that I have spent in his “care” — and “care” is in quotations — were the worst years of my life. Worse even than the last 26 years in prison.

“I accept responsibility for the crime I committed. However, the responsibility for turning me into an angry, alienated and despairing young man who killed a man belongs to Richard Bailey. And he has never faced up to what he did to me. Nor has he faced up to what he did to my brother and our mother, Wannee.

“I was born in Thailand, and at the age of two I was abandoned by my parents and then raised by my grandmother living on a small farm in the north of Thailand. When I was 11, my mother came to retrieve me and my brother and told us that she had married an American, that she would take us to live with him in the United States, that we would have a great life, and want for nothing.

“We came to America in December of 1985 when I was 12. Within two weeks, Richard Bailey began to sexually assault me. The first time was when I was lying on the floor covered with a blanket while I was watching television. Richard placed himself under the blanket and began to fondle me. I was terrified.

“On another occasion … he got in the shower with me and began to explain male physiology while fondling me. At other times he would make me watch pornographic material. It wasn’t long before things graduated to sodomy. He would do such things when my mother was not in the vicinity. He would take me for drives or go camping and he would sodomize me. I hated it. I hated him. I could not speak English, but Richard was clear that if I told about the sexual assaults there would be dire repercussions.

“At home, Richard was a tyrant and a drunken bully who was physically abusive to me, my mother and my brother. We lived a life of fear, intimidation, and violence. No one was allowed to speak Thai in the house and we were not permitted to have friends come over … He completely controlled our lives …

“I first ran away from him to escape the abuse at age 12, only to be returned to him by the police. I spoke very little English and wasn’t able to tell the police that Richard had been sexually assaulting me. I could not tell my mother at that time because Richard threatened what would happen to her if I told.

“Richard Bailey sexually assaulted me more times than he is charged with … I ran away again and again, living in juvenile detention centers, the homes of friends, or finding a place of shelter wherever I could. Sometimes my mother would bring me food when I was living under a bridge [In Bangor, pictured below]. When I had no food, I would steal. When I was caught I was sent to juvenile detention where I told counselors about the abuse and they reported it.”

— End of Transcript Excerpts

Justice Delayed — Repeatedly

Because Pornchai was a prisoner when Richard Bailey was finally brought before the Court, the D.A feared putting Pornchai on the witness stand in a trial. So Bailey was offered a plea deal, and like most guilty defendants, he accepted it. For 40 felony counts of child sexual abuse, Bailey would serve no time in prison and 18 years on probation. After registering on the State of Maine Sex Offender Registry, he quietly returned to his lakeside Oregon house.

Over the six years when Pornchai was 12 to 18 years of age leading up to his own offense, Maine officials received reports about the sexual abuse of Pornchai. These interventions were inexplicably ineffective. Official reports from the Maine Youth Center and Department of Human Services should have resulted in a protection order for Pornchai, and investigation of Richard Bailey, and criminal charges, but none of that happened. Here are excerpts:

November 8, 1989: “Pornchai alleges that his stepfather, Rick Bailey, perpetrated sexual and physical abuse upon him. [He] is concerned that Mr. Bailey will take out revenge on his mother.”

November 10, 1989: “Pornchai has trouble explaining himself in English, so it was hard to get more details from him. Also, he is protective of his mother.”

December 14, 1989: “[The sexual abuse] totally destroyed boy’s faith in family — mother made aware — did nothing. Boy began to habitually run away. Boy terrified some type of revenge will be taken out on mother.”

December 21, 1989: “Pornchai has opened up to me information about sexual abuse by his stepfather. This was a significant breakthrough with Pornchai since he has been holding this in … At this point we have notified the Dept. of Human Services.”

February 15, 1990: “In terms of the allegations of sexual abuse, Pornchai has to go to Bangor. He will have to make a tape or prepare some kind of testimony and he is having a very difficult time even thinking about the events that occurred.”

April 26, 1990: “Pornchai has been going through some major crises in his He went to court in Bangor and was made a ward of the State. His allegations of sexual abuse do not seem to have progressed … His mother was in to visit him and told him that she did not want him to go through with this issue any further. He fears that he will be harming his mother if he proceeds with this.”

From an undated Interagency Protocol Report: “Boy states that stepfather started touching him, talking “dirty,” showing porno movies and progressively became more abusive. Made Pornchai perform oral sex on him. He would pull his hair and slap him if he refused. He would set up situations where he would have Pornchai alone. Stated if he told anyone his mother would suffer.”

The record contains dozens of similar reports of violent sexual abuse, some much more graphic and disturbing. Sheriff’s deputies once found Pornchai escaping Bailey’s house by running along railroad tracks out of Bangor, but they did not understand his protests as they forcibly returned him to Richard Bailey. They wrote a report of their suspicions, however, but nothing happened.

Pornchai’s mother found blood on his bedding and underwear, but Bailey kept her in a silent state of poverty, desperation and helplessness according to statements from neighbors and others. One neighbor confronted Bailey after seeing 12-year-old Pornchai beaten and bloody. Bailey beat Pornchai again while forbidding him from interacting with others. A school nurse documented suspicions that Pornchai was sexually and physically abused, but she was advised to keep silent and not get involved.

Pornchai’s Offense

From there on Pornchai spent most of his childhood living on the streets of Bangor, a broken young man. Harassed by a Bangor gang, he carried a knife for protection. At the 2018 plea deal hearing for Richard Bailey, the D.A. read again from Pornchai’s Statement:

“A few months after I turned 18, I was involved in an incident at the local supermarket and I killed a man when I was highly intoxicated. I was tackled by Michael Scott McDowell, a man having a much larger frame than myself, and in a kneejerk reaction I took my knife and stabbed him and he later died. It was unintentional. At the moment I stabbed at him my mind was Richard Bailey on top of me and I never wanted to be in that situation again.”

It was not up to Pornchai Moontri to investigate and prosecute Bailey. That was the job of the State of Maine and the State failed him miserably. Pornchai was a traumatized child who neither spoke nor understood English when Bailey’s assaults commenced. After all the above interviews with DHS and Maine Youth Center staff, sheriff’s deputies interviewed Richard Bailey — and him alone. In his response, he gave them a well-rehearsed story about having lovingly opened his home to Pornchai, who doubled-down on his youthful shunning of a kind stepfather’s discipline by making false claims against him.

The sheriff’s deputies who interviewed Bailey in 1990 never questioned Pornchai, his brother, their mother, or any of the Maine Youth Center staff who made the above reports. This was not a case with dubious claims of repressed or recovered memory. No one can rightly claim today that sexual abuse just wasn’t on the radar in 1990. At the same time the above reports were made, a high-profile panic about sexual abuse by Catholic priests was brewing right next door to Maine in New Hampshire.

At Pornchai’s own trial in 1993, Bailey feared for what Pornchai might divulge to police and the Court so he took matters into his own hands. He wrote a letter to presiding Judge Margaret Kravchuk. He presented himself as a caring stepfather whose discipline was rejected by this by this wild child who turned on him. He blamed influence from Pornchai’s drug-infested and delinquent friends in order to deflect blame in case Pornchai pointed a finger at Bailey. These friends today describe that letter as “a pack of lies.”

Meanwhile, while held in Maine’s Penobscot County Jail waiting trial at age 18, Pornchai’s mother, Wannee, came to him, sent by Richard Bailey to deliver a message about what would happen to her if Pornchai told anyone about Bailey’s abuse of him. So he remained silent, refusing to participate in his own defense. Bailey’s egregious witness tampering took place right under the noses of Maine officials. Pornchai’s fear for the safety of his mother was well founded. The evidence for that loomed just over a distant horizon.

Getting Away with Murder

Wannee’s life had been a hard one even before meeting Bailey in Bangkok in the later 1970s. She was but 19 years old when she was abandoned in the rural north of Thailand by her first husband while raising two-year-old Priwan and still carrying the unborn Pornchai. In 1975, out of the desperation of poverty, she left them when they were two and four years of age hoping that her extended family would care for them.

Wannee traveled nine hours to Bangkok in search of work. Her first job was in construction. This small and frail young woman carried two large cement buckets on a pole as an indentured servant earning her meals and fifty cents a day. She later worked as a cook.

Richard Bailey had been a civilian helicopter pilot in Vietnam, but frequented the Bangkok area when the war ended. In the later 1970s, he and Wannee met. They married in Bangkok on February 14, 1980, then relocated to Bailey’s hometown of Bangor, Maine. There, with Wannee now in a foreign land where she spoke no English, he controlled her every move and would not allow her to pursue citizenship. He obtained work for her as a hotel chambermaid, but tightly controlled her income. Bailey knew that she left two young sons in Thailand, but he had no interest in them until they were 11 and 13 years old. Then, in 1985, he sent Wannee to retrieve them.

Two years after Pornchai was sentenced to prison, Richard Bailey sold his home in Maine and relocated with Wannee to the Western Pacific Island of Guam. Bailey secured work with the Federal Aviation Administration as an air traffic controller. They purchased a home in Talofofo, a small seaside town in the south of Guam. His life there was privileged, secure, and far from the wreckage he left behind in Maine.

The next few years passed by in relative comfort for Bailey living a new life in Guam, but Wannee grew increasingly troubled by all that had transpired. Finally, in late 1999, she became resolved to leave Bailey and filed for divorce in a Guam court. On February 14, 2000, a divorce decree was finalized with a judgment against Bailey which included the following provisions:

1. 1. That Bailey pay Wannee monthly alimony payments of $1,000;

   2. That the jointly owned home in Talofofo be sold and the proceeds be divided equally,

   3. That upon Bailey reaching the age of 59½, he pay to Wannee $8,000 as her share of his IRA; and

   4. That Bailey pay Wannee $25,000 from a money market account in May 2000.

   Wannee had built up the courage to leave and return to Thailand, but both her sons were in their 20s living in Maine. Pornchai was in his eighth year in prison where he was stranded with no family help or support at all. While in Thailand, Wannee used what little funds she had to secure a small parcel of land and began to have a house built for her and her sons whom she hoped to redeem from the past. However, back in Guam Richard Bailey simply ignored court orders for payments to Wannee. So she planned a fateful return to Guam to seek justice.

   On her way back to Guam, Wannee visited Pornchai in prison in Maine. She apologized for not believing him as a child, and for the years of torment he suffered. She told him that she had divorced Bailey and was going to expose all that he had done to her, Pornchai, and Priwan. But first, she said, she was returning to Guam to seek enforcement of the divorce decree. She had no idea she was going to her death.

   Weeks later, while alone in a Maine prison, Pornchai received word from Richard Bailey’s sister in Maine that Wannee had died in Guam. Pornchai was left with an impression that his mother had accidentally fallen from a high cliff, but his instincts knew better. He asked Bailey’s sister, “Did Richard kill my mother” There was a moment’s pause before she answered, “I don’t know.”

   After all the wreckage of the past, this news was devastating for Pornchai. He gave up on his life and ended up serving the next several years in the maddening cruelty of Maine State Prison’s “SuperMax” solitary confinement unit. (PBS Frontline produced a video documentary on Maine’s solitary confinement.) Pornchai had surpassed nearly all other prisoners in the amount of time spent there. Then, in 2005, he was transferred to the neighboring New Hampshire State Prison where he spent the next 15 years with me.

   Over these years, as the story of Pornchai’s life unfolded, I wrote several additional articles. Clare Farr, Pornchai’s advocate in Western Australia, joined me in an effort to investigate. Among the many inroads we made was one to officials in Guam who released Wannee’s April 2000 autopsy report. It revealed that her cause of death was ruled a homicide.

   Wannee had been beaten to death according to the autopsy report. Her broken ribs caused devastating injuries to inner organs and a broken wrist revealed defensive wounds. Wannee was 47 years old at the time she died. Pornchai sat in our cell and wept openly upon learning the truth about the death of his mother.

   
   

2. Cold Case Homicide

   According to Guam police statements, Richard Bailey had reported that Wannee was on the Island visiting with him, but went missing. Two days later, Bailey reported filing Wannee’s body himself. Because this technically remains an open cold case homicide, though now dormant for 22 years, Guam police have seemed reluctant to provide further information.

   However, an interview with Wannee’s niece conducted by Clare Farr in 2016, revealed that Wannee telephoned her from Guam on the day she died. She said Wannee was frantic, saying that Richard had threatened her. Richard could be heard shouting in the background. Wannee told her niece in Thai, “If I am found dead, Richard did it and I want you to demand an investigation.”

   Bailey never did pay Wannee the money she was owed in alimony, or the money due to her from his IRA and the money market account and the sale of their jointly owned Guam property. And on her death, he should have paid the money due to the executor of Wannee’s estate. However, Bailey never told the executor that there were court orders in place and that he owed money to Wannee, so the money never went into Wannee’s estate for distribution to Pornchai and Priwan, who had been Bailey’s victims of abuse. This money would have been of crucial importance to Pornchai tasked with starting life over after he emerged from prison. He returned to Thailand penniless with nothing but the clothes he was wearing.

   None of the above — not the background about Richard’s crimes against Pornchai and Priwan that he desperately wanted covered up, nor the telephone call from Wannee to her niece — was known to Guam police at the time they first investigated the homicide of Wannee in 2000. We believe that there is now sufficient cause to reopen this case and identify a suspect.

   In a December 19, 2021 Guam Daily News article by Nick Delgado, “GPD Enhancing Efforts to Solve 103 Cold Cases,” Guam police Chief Stephen Ignacio described new efforts to investigate and close these unsolved cases. He also revealed that he led the Guam Cold Case Task Force in the early 2000s, the time of Wannee’s death. The Guam police have posted a short video describing these cases. A box containing the case of the homicide of Wannee Laporn Bailey is visibly at the top — and it is in the top graphic on this post along with a photo of Wannee and Pornchai.

   Wannee’s cremated remains were returned to Thailand after her death in 2000. Upon his own return to Thailand in 2021, Pornchai prayed at her tomb for the first time and slept in the half-built home she had hoped to complete for him. Pornchai is overwhelmed with the wreckage not only of his own life, but with the lives of Wannee and Priwan as well. Rebuilding is a daunting task, but Pornchai Moontri is today a man of unconquerable faith and an inspiration to many.

   Richard Alan Bailey still resides at his lakeside Oregon home. After Wannee’s death in 2000, he traveled to Thailand and returned with a new Thai wife 31 years younger than himself.

   + + +

   Please click here to view the Guam Court orders for restitution to Wannee and her estate for which Wannee died while Bailey ignored the Court orders.

   Please share this important story and visit these related posts:

   Former Maine Man to Serve no Prison Time for Sex Abuse in the 1980s (Bangor Daily News 09/12/2018)

   Human Trafficking: Thailand to America and a Cold Case in Guam

   For Pornchai Moontri, a Miracle Unfolds in Thailand

   Pornchai Moontri: A Night in Bangkok, a Year in Freedom

   Documents in the Story of Pornchai Moontri

   To help Pornchai rebuild his life, visit our “Special Events” Pag