Those who have been reading my blog for a long time are aware of the circumstances surrounding Mother Dawn, the Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Guam, and Archbishop Anthony Apuron. On November 15, 2016, Mother Dawn came out publicly and revealed the donor of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and accused then Archbishop Apuron of not respecting the donor's wish to remain anonymous. According to KUAM news (the bold is mine):
In a rare press conference, Mother Dawn talked to local media to share her side of the story relating to the RMS property in Yona. You see, after years of speculation about who was the mystery $2 million benefactor that allowed for the archdiocese's acquisition of the RMS property.
he finally came out, saying all it took was a phone call to her Carmelite sisters in the US mainland. "There was no he, it was a she - and it was me," she said. "So the truth of where the money came from is as easy as that."
According to the mother superior, her wish to remain anonymous was not respected.
The JungleWatch blog also had its own timeline regarding Mother Dawn, which you can find here. However, that timeline is incomplete. According to Rohr's post:
JAN 02, 2003: The Carmelite community in St. Louis, MO, agrees to lend Archdiocese of Agana the money to pay off the approximate 2 Million dollar mortgage note, interest free. (The offer of a loan eventually became a free and clear gift).
DEC 17, 2014: Mother Dawn Marie, on business for her Carmelite order, is in the office of the St. Louis Carmelite community when an email from Archbishop Apuron arrives addressed to the Prioress of the St. Louis community. In the email Apuron asks the St. Louis Prioress to sign a pre-written letter stating that the original intent of the 2003 donation was for the "purchase of the Accion Hotel for the Archdiocese of Agana for the purpose of housing the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and the Theological Institute for the formation of priests."
These are the facts:
January 2, 2003: The Carmelite community in St. Louis, MO agrees to give the Archdiocese of Agana 2 million dollars to acquire the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.
August 6, 2014: Mother Dawn contacted Tim Rohr and told him who the donor was. Tim published it in his blog, which you can see here. According to Tim Rohr dated August 6, 2014 (the bold is mine):
The 2 million dollar gift to purchase the Yona property did not fall from heaven. Mother Dawn, because she is devoted to our Catholic Church, spearheaded the effort to find a donor through her order and specifically through her fellow Carmelites in St. Louis, Missouri.
August 7, 2014: Patty Arroyo spoke with Mother Dawn. Mother Dawn also revealed who the donor was to Patty Arroyo. So, the news media already knew. Patty Arroyo made a comment in the jungle about her interview with Mother Dawn. According to her comment:
Patti ArroyoAugust 7, 2014 at 7:29 AMI have spoken personally with Mother Dawn Marie on this. All reported above on the "deal" for Redemptoris Mater Seminary is true, especially the part about the notion that the Carmelites had an extra 2 million laying around. Because the conditions of the "gift", not loan were violated people think the Carmelites don't need help. In fact, they live on $30 each a day and Mother Dawn Marie is currently scouring the country for financial support. If anyone is interested in a solution...help the Carmelites. It's the most productive, personal effort you can make to help fix an otherwise out of control holy war.
December 17, 2014 (taken from Tim's own blog): Mother Dawn Marie, on business for her Carmelite order, is in the office of the St. Louis Carmelite community when an email from Archbishop Apuron arrives addressed to the Prioress of the St. Louis community. In the email Apuron asks the St. Louis Prioress to sign a pre-written letter stating that the original intent of the 2003 donation was for the "purchase of the Accion Hotel for the Archdiocese of Agana for the purpose of housing the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and the Theological Institute for the formation of priests."
November 15, 2016: Mother Dawn comes out publicly to blame Archbishop Apuron that the donor's wish to remain anonymous was not respected (See KUAM news.)
So, you see, it was never Bishop Apuron who revealed the donor's identity. It was Mother Dawn herself. She first revealed it to Tim Rohr who published it in his blog in August 6, 2014, two years before she came out public. The donor's identity was already published in a blog for the entire world to see before Bishop Apuron even sent his email.
Why did I bring this up? Canon lawyers suspected that the guilty verdict of Bishop Apuron had nothing to do with child sexual abuse. In fact, many canon lawyers concluded that the guilty verdict must be something else. However, the Vatican never said what Apuron was guilty of nor did they mention what charges were brought against him. See the news report here.
What I do know is that Bishop Apuron appealed the verdict against him after he was found guilty. Right after that, I received an email from Father Pius, asking me to email him the evidence that Mother Dawn revealed the donor's identity to Tim Rohr and that Rohr published it in his blog. Unfortunately, the verdict was upheld by the Vatican without even reviewing the evidence. So, the evidence was never presented.
It is also possible that Rohr knew the identity of the donor since 2013 because of what he published in his blog. According to Rohr's post dated November 26, 2013 (the bold and underline is mine):
However, even the extremely low price was still a lot of money for the archdiocese. Arrangements were made to purchase the property on terms, but the completion of the purchase was accelerated when the archdiocese received a large gift to assist in the purchase of the property through a religious order based in the states.
The gift had the condition that the source remain absolutely anonymous. The condition of anonymity was critical because the donor did not want to hurt the religious order through which it came, and of which, there is a branch on Guam.
So, the bottom line is that Bishop Apuron never revealed the identity of the donor as shown in my timeline. The donor was already revealed when it was published through the JungleWatch blog for the entire world to see.
So, JW used Apuron's email as the excuse for violating the donor's wishes to be anonymous?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 4:01 pm,
DeleteIt would seem so despite that the email was addressed to the donor rather than the public. Nevertheless, when the jungle learned about the email, it became an opportunity to accuse the Archbishop of violating the donor's wishes when in fact the publication of the donor's identity four months earlier on JungleWatch was the true violation.
Patty Arroyo’s comment is very interesting. She wrote that the Carmelites in Guam were struggling and had to live on $30 a day cuz the condition of the gift was violated. How can that be? Tim revealed the donor just the day before her interview with Mother Dawn. Before that no one knew the donor. We in the NCW always thought it was a rich member in the Way.
ReplyDeleteVery sad. 😢 Tim left out the publication of the donor on August 6, 2014. But why would Mother Dawn do such a thing?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 9:02 pm,
DeleteI do not know why Mother Dawn blamed Bishop Apuron for something that she did herself. There is no record or evidence of Apuron coming out in public revealing the donor's identity. The evidence points to Mother Dawn.
Mother Dawn is human. She wanted attention. In the news, she was taking the credit for the 2 million dollars, but it was the Carmelites in the US who gave the money. Most members in the Way suspected that it was a rich businessman walking in the Way who donated the money.
ReplyDeleteDear Jane Doe,
DeleteI admit I was one of those who thought the donor was a rich CEO. The rumor that the donor was a rich businessman walking in the Way circulated because everyone was speculating. Apuron kept it secret that even the NCW did not know, which explains all the wild speculation among us. Not once did I thought it would come from a religious order.
I also agree that Mother Dawn may have wanted attention. According to KUAM:
"During a press conference held at the Carmelite’s home in Tamuning, Mother Dawn revealed that she was the one who was able to secure $2 million dollars from her Carmelite Sisters in the states to pay off a loan that was used by the Archdiocese of Agana to purchase the RMS property in Yona. The donor was supposed to be kept anonymous. Mother Dawn said Archbishop Apuron not only revealed that the Carmelite Sisters in the states were the benefactor but also years later he would write a letter asking that they say the donation was purposely earmarked for the RMS and the San Vitores Theological Institute of Oceania."
Apuron did keep it secret. It was Mother Dawn who revealed the donor's identity by sharing it with Tim Rohr who then published the donor's identity on his blog for the entire world to see. Nevertheless, Bishop Anthony was falsely accused of revealing the donor's identity.
It makes you wonder doesn’t it dear Diana? If they can falsely accuse AB Anthony of that, then what else did they falsely accused him of?
Delete@Anonymous 1:20 p.m., apparently AB Apuron was also falsely accused of child sexual abuse because he was never laicized. He remains a bishop to this day. This is a list of laicized bishops. 4 of them were laicized for child sexual abuse and 1 was laicized for importing child pornography. McCarrick's name is on the list, but Apuron is not.
Deletehttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Laicized_Roman_Catholic_bishops
Diana, was Dr. Eusebio telling the truth when he came publicly and said that Apuron only dealt with the St. Louis nuns rather than Mother Dawn regarding the 2 million dollars? Asking for a friend.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 3:47 pm,
DeleteI apologize for the late reply. I will answer your question in a post soon.
@Anon. 3:47 pm. Yes, Eusebio was telling the truth. All the emails were between AB Apuron and Mother Superior in St. Loius, MO. The Carmelites in the US gave the money, not Mother Dawn.
DeletePersonally, I think Eusebio should have focused on Mother Dawn's accusation when she blamed Apuron for breaking the anonymity of the donor's identity. The evidence was in JW. Once you established that fact, then her credibility is gone.
Delete