Going Down Memory Lane

 You can find the following article here:

_______________________________________

Vatican verdict against Guam archbishop likely not for sexual abuse, say canon lawyers

AVatican tribunal's guilty verdict last month against a Guam archbishop, hailed by some as the first instance of the Catholic Church successfully prosecuting a bishop accused of abusing minors, appears likely not to have been made in direct relation to allegations of sexual abuse by the prelate.

A number of prominent canon lawyers say the punishment announced for Agana Archbishop Anthony Apuron — removal from office and a prohibition from living on the U.S. island territory — simply seems too lax to indicate the bishop was found guilty of abuse.

The canonists, speaking in interviews since the March 16 announcement of the verdict from a five-judge apostolic tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the expected punishment for sexual abuse of a minor would usually be laicization, known formally as dismissal from the clerical state.

"It must be that he wasn't found directly guilty of sexual abuse," said Oblate Fr. Francis Morrisey, a former president of the Canadian Canon Law Society who has advised numerous Vatican offices and local bishops' conferences. "Otherwise, I think he would have been dismissed from the clerical state."

Msgr. Frederick Easton, a former president of the U.S. Canon Law Society, said the punishment for Apuron did not appear proportional to a finding of guilt in regards to sexual abuse.

"One would have thought ... if the bishop were found guilty of sexual abuse of minors, that could easily be a reason for dismissal from the clerical state for him," said Easton, who also served for 31 years as the judicial vicar for the Indianapolis archdiocese.

Easton, Morrisey and two other canon lawyers said it seemed more reasonable to assume Apuron was found guilty of a so-called "boundary violation," such as solicitation in the confessional.

A fifth canonist suggested reports that the 72-year-old is facing a decline in his physical condition might have mitigated the punishment imposed on him.

The Vatican tribunal did not say in its announcement of which exact acts the Guam archbishop had been found guilty, or even what specific charges had been brought against him. It simply stated that it had found the prelate "guilty of certain of the accusations."

Morrisey, who is a canon law professor at Saint Paul University in Ottawa, said the Vatican tribunal might have released so few details about its verdict against Apuron because the case involved material related to the confessional, which would be subject to pontifical secrecy.

U.S. Cardinal Raymond Burke, a noted canonist, served as the presiding judge on the Vatican tribunal.

Apuron, a Guam native who had led the island's only diocese since 1986, was placed on leave by Pope Francis in June 2016 after a series of accusations about abuse of young men in the 1960s and 70s were made public.

According to the filing number of a request for testimony to the Vatican tribunal, obtained by NCR, the canonical case against Apuron was first opened in 2008.

In October 2016, Francis named Michael Byrnes, then an auxiliary bishop in Detroit, as Guam's coadjutor archbishop, granting him special faculties to run the archdiocese in Apuron's place.

In October 2016, Francis named Michael Byrnes, then an auxiliary bishop in Detroit, as Guam’s coadjutor archbishop, granting him special faculties to run the archdiocese in Apuron’s place.

As coadjutor, Byrnes would automatically become full archbishop with Apuron’s removal from office. But Apuron has indicated he will appeal the ruling, and during such an appeal the penalties against the archbishop are suspended.

The allegations against Apuron are only a few of some 150 cases of clergy sexual abuse currently being brought forward against the Guam archdiocese, which announced March 27 that it will sell its chancery property to raise money to pay for expected settlements.

Patrick Wall, a canon lawyer and former Benedictine priest who is now a lead researcher for a civil law firm that specializes in representing clergy abuse victims, suggested the tribunal may have intentionally “backed off” any charges of direct sexual abuse against Apuron.

Wall, an advocate for Jeff Anderson & Associates, said the Vatican might have had motive to do that in order to limit the Guam archdiocese’s liability in dozens of pending lawsuits about its alleged mismanagement of abusive clergy.

“I guess they ... proceeded on solicitation because it gets the same final result but also does not trigger civil liability back in the hundreds of cases in Guam,” said Wall.

“If it can be proven using an internal church document that the CEO of a corporation knew that [child sexual abuse] was going on -- he himself was doing it -- then that is notice for a negligence case and the Archdiocese of Agana in Guam has major problems,” he said.

Apuron had 15 days upon being notified of the verdict against him to indicate to the doctrinal congregation that he would be appealing the tribunal’s decision in his case.

Assuming the archbishop has challenged the ruling, Easton and Morrisey said the appeal would likely be evaluated by the full cardinal and bishop membership of the congregation, or by a new tribunal formed of a number of the members.

According to the 2017 pontifical yearbook, there are currently 27 members of the congregation, including known figures such as: U.S. Cardinals Sean O’Malley and Donald Wuerl, and noted canonists Italian Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio and Maltese Archbishop Charles Scicluna.

Easton said that the ruling made on the appeal will be final and that there will be no possibility of a second challenge. The canonist said that the Vatican’s prosecutor could also ask the appeal tribunal to impose a greater penalty on Apuron, such as laicization, should other circumstances or facts come to light.

Nodding to Apuron’s chances of a successful challenge, Morrisey noted Burke’s reputation as an exacting lawyer. “With Cardinal Burke being the presiding judge in the first instance, he knows his law inside out,” said the canonist. “If anyone knows the canons today, he’s the one who knows them.”

_____________________________________________

Bishop Apuron filed for an appeal, which he had a right to do. However, his appeal was never heard. It was rejected. You can read the story here. 

In my opinion, I think the Vatican rejected his appeal because they feared Apuron's life may be in danger if he were to return to the island. There was a climate of fear and intimidation, pressuring the Vatican to find him guilty regardless of the evidence. Apuron admitted in news report that some people came forward revealing to him that they were asked to make false accusations against him. 

Responding to Anonymous

 This is in response to an Anonymous poster, who states:

AnonymousJanuary 17, 2025 at 1:54 M

In the Archdiocese's Ecclesial Disclosure Statement, it states that Apuron was "Found guilty of delicts against the Sixth Commandment with minors". The statement can be found here https://files.ecatholic.com/16576/documents/2024/12/Ecclesial%20Disclosure%20Statment%20re%20Decisions%20by%20DDF.Final%20Signed.pdf?t=1733452417000

Your information came from the Archdiocese of Agana, which probably obtained the information outside the Vatican. The information below came directly from the Vatican press release. It was the Vatican who found Apuron guilty and gave its final verdict. You can find the Vatican press release here.

PRESS RELEASE FROM THE APOSTOLIC TRIBUNAL OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

The canonical trial in the matter of accusations, including accusations of sexual abuse of minors, brought against the Most Reverend Anthony Sablan APURON, O.F.M.Cap., Archbishop of Agaña, Guam, has been concluded.

The Apostolic Tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, composed of five judges, has issued its sentence of first instance, finding the accused guilty of certain of the accusations and imposing upon the accused the penalties of privation of office and prohibition of residence in the Archdiocese of Guam. The sentence remains subject to possible appeal. In the absence of an appeal, the sentence becomes final and effective. In the case of an appeal, the imposed penalties are suspended until final resolution.

This is the verdict we rely on because it was the press release that came from the Vatican. The Vatican never specified the offense Apuron was found guilty of. 

It is clear from the press release that Apuron was accused of other offenses, INCLUDING child sexual abuse. But the Vatcan press release never listed those "other accusations" nor did they specified what offenses they found him guilty of. As many canon lawyers pointed out, the offense could not be child sexual abuse because Apuron still retained his title as Bishop. Other bishops, such as Cardinal McCarrick, who was found guilty of child sexual abuse, were laicized.

March for Life

 Tomorrow is the March for Life at the Cathedral. Come out and support our Archdiocese, our Archbishop Ryan, and Father Harold, who will be the main speaker. As most people know, Father Harold has the zeal of the Holy Spirit, making him an excellent speaker.

The Neocatechumenal Way is well-known for having large families because we are open to life. We carry life in us as we bear fruits. We carry the life of the Gospel as we evangelize. We carry life as we produce vocations and large families. 

The Truth About CCOG

 As I have pointed out in my previous post, the former Archbishop of Agana, Anthony Apuron, was a target for a witchhunt. The purpose of the witchhunt was to remove him from office. The Concerned Catholics of Guam (CCOG) went on a witchhunt to remove Apuron. In 2015, CCOG paid for an ad targeting Apuron. The ad was given to SNAP and published in the jungle. Below was the ad paid by CCOG. Notice the dates and places shown on their ad.

This ad specifically targeted Apuron and no other priest in Guam. CCOG and SNAP worked together to bring down Apuron, who still remains a bishop to this day. The Vatican never said he was guilty of child sexual abuse. The Vatican never gave a specific offense. Only the media and public opinion named the offense. Nevertheless, CCOG and SNAP worked together. According to the Guam Daily Post:

Rohr said the CCOG has been in contact with Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. The SNAP organization helps heal those who have been sexually victimized.

However, SNAP does not help victims of sexual abuse. They exploit them and use them to bring down the Catholic Church (see the information here). According to news report: 

The lawsuit by Gretchen Rachel Hammond names Clohessy and other SNAP leaders as defendants and alleges that "SNAP does not focus on protecting or helping survivors — it exploits them."

The group, which more than any other is responsible for revealing the scandals that have continued to rock Catholicism in the U.S. and around the world, "routinely accepts financial kickbacks from attorneys in the form of 'donations,' " Hammond alleges.

In exchange for the kickbacks, SNAP refers survivors as potential clients to attorneys, who then file lawsuits on behalf of the survivors against the Catholic Church. These cases often settle, to the financial benefit of the attorneys and, at times, to the financial benefit of SNAP, which has received direct payments from survivors' settlements."

Hammond, who worked on fundraising for SNAP from 2011 until 2013, said she feared reprisals from SNAP leaders over her objections to the lawyers' payments and suffered serious health problems as a result. She said she was fired in 2013, allegedly because she confronted her bosses over their practices with victims' attorneys and that the dismissal has hurt her career. 

The lawsuit was first reported by National Catholic Reporter.

Furthermore, CCOG does not represent Catholics. They only represent themselves.

Guam Clergy Sexual Abuse Part 2

 The Guam Clergy sexual abuse started with John Toves who accused former Archbishop Anthony Apuron of sexually abusing his relative....a relative whom he never spoke to. According to KUAM news:

Toves is accusing the archbishop of sexually abusing his relative over thirty years ago. Despite these allegations however Toves admits that he had never spoken personally to his relative about the alleged abuse.  According to Toves he obtained the information through fellow seminarians when he was in the seminary.  At this point no victim has stepped forward.

 The Guam Clergy sexual abuse never started with Roy Quintanilla. Nevertheless, Roy Quintanilla came out in 2016, accusing Apuron of sexually abusing him. According to Tim Rohr:

I have shared this many times, but it needs to be continually shared. These four did not demand compensation, they demanded an apology - only an apology. At that point, Apuron could have put out a statement saying "I'm sorry, but I did not abuse you" and it probably would have all been over. 

But he didn't. While he did state that he did not abuse them, he also threatened to sue them for saying so.

This is false. The lawwsuit was for those who put out an ad targeting the former Archbishop.  According to news report (the bold is mine):

On Friday, the archdiocese announced plans to file lawsuits against those who had been spreading “malicious lies” about the local Roman Catholic Church, addressing a full-page advertisement published locally the previous weekend that asked victims of sexual abuse to come forward.

In his video statement, Apuron referred to what he called “malicious ads.” Concerned Catholics of Guam, a group that has been critical of the archbishop, paid for the ads.

The video clearly showed the former Archbishop saying, "malicious ads." You can see the video here. The video and news report came out after Roy accused Apuron of sexually abusing him. After that video, Roy Quintanilla called Apuron a liar. 

The first four accusers of Apuron after John Toves were all from Agat and knew each other. They were Roy Quintanilla, Roland Sondia, Walter Denton, and Doris Concepcion who claimed her deceased son was sexually abused. However, there were only two people who came forward, stating  that they reported their sexual abuse to Father Jack Niland ( who was deceased). Those two were Roy Quintanilla and Walter Denton. Both claimed that Father Jack brushed off their plea for help. However, Deacon Tenorio came out, stating that there were no reports of sexual abuse filed by Father Jack Niland. 

So, Frances Chargulaf, who is also a friend of Roy Quintanilla and lives in the same state as Walter Denton, came forward and accused Father Jack Niland of sexually abusing him. With that allegation, everyone would probably conclude the reason why no reports were filed by Father Jack. 

Nevertheless, Roy Quintanilla had positive things to say about Father Jack after he passed away. According to Roy Quintanilla:

Roy Quintanilla

August 17, 2009

My Dear Friend Fr. Jack, taught me the meaning of true friendship. He was not only my best friend, mentor, and confidant he was someone I really enjoyed spending time with. No matter what we were doing, whether we were together or talking from a distance life felt like it had a purpose. He had a way of balancing life's ups and downs and inspite of everything, made us aware that life is a precious gift to be cherished and that we should all be greatful for everything life bestows on us. Thank you my Friend for always looking out for me and my family when you were here and I know you're looking out for us from Heaven. I miss you and I wish you were still with us, but like you said, God has plans for all of us and we are all were we should be. I will remember you for as long as I can because I know that "Death is not in passing but in the forgetfulness."

Furthermore, if Father Jack was a sexual predator, the most likely person he would sexually abused would be Roland Sondia for he was very close to him and his family. See the information here. Below are photos of Roland Sondia and Father Jack before he passed away.

With this information, you decide whether there was indeed a conspiracy to remove Apuron and an attempt to destroy the Catholic Church by introducing a law removing the statutes of limitations. Also, remember that the Vatican never specified what offense Apuron was guilty of. It was only the media who named the offense. Furthermore, Apuron was never removed of his status as Bishop while other priests and bishops were laicized and stripped of their faculties when found guilty of child sexual abuse.

At Father Nino's Funeral

 

RIP Father Antonino Caminiti

 Father Antonino Caminiti passed away yesterday. Rest in peace, Father Nino. We love you! 

The Guam Clergy Sex Scandal

 The Guam Clergy Sex Scandal started with John Toves, who is now deceased after struggling with cancer. Je accused then Archbishop Anthony Apuron of sexually molesting his relative, whom he has never spoken to. After John admitted that he never spoke to his relative. His relative never even came out to support John's allegations. So, no one believed John Toves. 

Then four other people came out in public to accuse then Archbishop Anthony Apuron again. According to Tim Rohr:

Had Apuron admitted his crimes or even met privately to apologize to his initial accusers, the archdiocese might have been spared the loss of millions and millions of dollars in legal fees and properties, most of which had been given to the Church by common, hard-working Catholics who sacrificed their own comfort and family security to help the Church they loved. 

This is my response: 

SERIOUSLY!!! They came out in PUBLIC, accusing  Apuron of sexual abuse, and you want him to meet them in PRIVATE! SERIOUSLY!!! You also want him to admit to the crimes.Then Rohr said this (the bold is mine):

In fact, Apuron, if he really did not do what he was accused of, would not have even had to apologize. He could have just met with those initial accusers and heard them out. I was involved with those initial accusers and I can state for a fact that all they wanted to do was confront the man they believed who had hurt them in their childhood. They did not want to sue - there was no way for them to do that in the beginning anyway, they did not want to hurt the Church, they did not want to do anything other than to assuage their childhood pain.

Apuron DID say that he did not do what they accused him of. He claimed to be innocent to this day. And what did the four accusers do? They proceeded to sue him and the Archdiocese for 2 million dollars. According to news report:

Four people who publicly accused Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron of sexually abusing altar boys in Agat in the 1970s filed a libel and slander lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Agana, Apuron and up to 50 other unnamed defendants for calling them liars and for accusing them of “instilling hatred, ignorance and violence in the people.”

The plaintiffs in the suit are Doris Y. Concepcion, Roy T. Quintanilla, Walter G. Denton and Roland Paul L. Sondia. Through their attorney, David Lujan, they filed the lawsuit in the Superior Court Friday morning. The plaintiffs are seeking no less than $500,000 each for all general damages, for a total of at least $2 million

Well, so much for not being interested in money. Even before the sexual allegations came out against Apuron, Rohr wanted Apuron to step down as Archbishop of Guam. According to KUAM news

In Tumon, local blogger Tim Rohr spoke before island Rotarians. Rohr writes Jungle Watch, a blog that covers issues involving the island's Catholic community. Even prior to the removal of Monsignor James Benavente Rohr has been highly critical of Archbishop Anthony Apuron for his controversial removal of Father Paul Gofigan last year from the Santa Barbara Church.

Rohr said, "My only hope is that the archbishop for his own health resigns ASAP."

One Rotarian questioned, "There seems to be a lot of conviction on your part on the archbishop's part - do you see any amicable meeting or meeting or meeting of the minds or compromise?", to which Rohr replied, "Absolutely not." He then reaffirmed his belief that the archbishop needs to resign.

Rohr announced this in 2014, two years BEFORE Roy Quintanilla publicly came out to accuse Apuron of child sexual abuse. 

At any rate, although they claimed that they were not doing it for the money, they went ahead and pushed forward a bill that would give the four accusers to bring a lawsuit against the Archdiocese for 5 million dollars. Again, so much for not being interested in the money. 

Then others came out of the woodworks also seeking 5 million dollars from the Archdiocese. Many of these accusers couldn't be identified because they only used their initials, and many of them accused dead priests. No investigation was done to verify their stories. Some of these accusers came from: 

1.  A Protestant who claimed to be an altar server in a Catholic Church.

2.  A person who claimed to be a "back-up" altar server.

3.  A female who claimed to be raped by Father Brouillard during a "Boy Scouts" event.

4.  A person who claimed to be raped during a fiesta where hundreds of people were present 

5. A person who claimed to be sexually abused by Fr. George Maddock just a few days after his death and while other youth praised the priest. 

Are there any real victims out there? I'm sure there were, but their numbers have been overshadowed by the numerous false claims.

At the End of the Day

 In his post, Tim Rohr wrote that Father Harold of ten years ago is not the same Father Harold today. More than 10 years ago, Rohr had only good things to say about the Way. In 2008, Tim Rohr wrote positive words about the Way and the priests walking in the Way. According to Rohr’s letter (the bold is mine):

4. The NCW is producing vocations. And I know that the seminarians are learning Latin and Gregorian Chant in conformity with the true wishes of Vatican II. I don’t see that happening anywhere else.

5. I see NCW priests wearing their clerics. They are visible to the community. God Bless them for that.

6. I was sitting with Fr. Ivan and Fr. Eric Forbes when Fr. Ivan asked Fr. Eric if he would teach the seminarians how to say the Traditional Latin Mass. Fr. Eric responded positively and also offered to teach them the theology of this beautiful Mass. This is in conformity with the wishes (if not command) of the Pope in his recent Moto Proprio. I don’t see anyone else rushing to embrace the Pope’s desires in this regard.

7. The NCW is teaching people to study their faith. They are studying the Scriptures, the Catechism, and the Early Fathers. It’s wonderful to see.

8. I understand that the NCW is also active in the prison. I used to teach in the prison for GCC and saw how active non-Catholic groups were with the prisoners. The majority of the prisoners are Catholic. Where is the Catholic ministry? The NCW is now there.

9. I see the NCW going out 2 by 2, knocking on doors and inviting people back to the Church, in other words, doing exactly what Christ commanded. The only other group that I know that does this is the Legion of Mary, so good for them too.

10. Most of all I am moved by the politeness, the kindness, the general charity of those I know in the NCW, especially the priests and seminarians, but essentially most everybody I know personally who is connected with it.

Rohr wrote this about 16 years ago. Today, Troy wrote:

My dad was part of the Way, and I never knew him to be a happier person prior to his membership in the community where he belonged. In fact, every person I know and I have met who has been in the Way is a joyful, excited Catholic.

 So, Rohr had positive things to say about the NCW and the priests walking in the Way more than 10 years ago. TODAY, Troy said positive things about Father Harold and some people walking in the Way. Therefore, it was not the priests, seminarians, or those walking in the Way who has changed. It was Tim Rohr who changed. 

Regarding Troy’s Reflection

 Troy’s story can be found here. According to Troy (the bold is mine):  

Here's the ironic twist. As a returning newcomer to my Catholic faith, I wasn't much informed of the politics surrounding the archdiocese and I had no idea Father Harold was among the priests often targeted by JungleWatch due to his association with the Neocatechumenal Way. I remember finding that out a few weeks into my journey back into Christianity and thinking, 'Gosh, I have no idea what's so wrong with Father Harold, and now I wonder about all this other stuff being said against the Way.'

There are always two sides to every story. Unfortunately, Troy only heard one side. Had he heard the other side, he would have met Father Harold sooner. Ten years ago, Father Harold was persecuted simply because he walked in the NCW and was a seminarian in RMS. He was even nicknamed "Boboboy" by Tim Rohr. When Father Harold was assigned to Talofofo Church, the parishioners there opposed him so much because of the stories told by JungleWatch. They never gave him a chance. So, Father Harold's assignment to Talofofo Church was rescinded, which was a loss for Talofofo Church. Today, if one were to speak to the parishioners of San Dimas and San Dionicio, they will tell you that he is an excellent priest especially to the youth. He is also well-loved in St. Anthony Church where he previously served. So, Talofofo Church lost out because they listened to the jungle folks.

Father Harold was persecuted by JungleWatch only because he walks in the Way and was an RMS seminarian. It did not matter that Father Harold is a diocesan priest of the Catholic Church. It did not matter that he was an excellent priest who was capable of reaching our youth and to people who do not walk in the Way. According to Troy Torres (the bold is mine): 

The scapegoating of the Way reminds me a bit of Guamanians who blame crime on Chuukese people, forgetting that Chamorros commit more violent crime than our Micronesian brothers and sisters do.

Scrapegoating is correct.