Vocations

The Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Guam produced 17 priests for Guam. That was the fruit of the Neocatecumenal Way. The Seminary would still be here today if Archbishop Byrnes (God rest his soul) had not removed the Deed of Restriction. The Deed of Restriction protected the Seminary from being sold in the bankruptcy case of the Archdiocese. With it gone, the Seminary was sold, and no more priests were produced for Guam. So, what happened to the many RMS priests who studied here? They were rejected by Archbishop Brynes and were told to find another diocese elsewhere. According to news report:

"The main reason for closing the seminary is that it is just not a sustainable model for the Archdiocese of Agana," he said, adding that the RMS model envisions a type and formation of priesthood that works in a place like Denver or Miami, for example, where there are millions of Catholics.

According to Jokers Wild (the highlight is mine):

The four Chamorro Seminarians met one on one with AB Byrnes and it was his decision not to ordain them under the Archdiocese of Agana because he felt the RMS was not the acceptable model of priest formation for Guam. Guam has lost these four Chamorro Seminarians to U.S. mainland Archdioceses during a time when Guam really needed younger priests to begin replacing some of the aging and sickly priests on Guam.

The Neocatechumenal Way in Guam currently has 2 Seminarians studying off-island for the priesthood, but they will be ordained in other dioceses. Guam is experiencing a shortage of priests, especially since we have now lost 2 priests: Father Antonio "Nino" Caminiti and Pale Mike Crisostomo. So, Guam is in dire need of priests. This is where we are today. 

Message to Archbishop Ryan Jimenez

 The damage has been done. Indeed, in our society, a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Unfortunately, your Pastoral decree with Prot. No. 02-48 has done more damage than you realize. The moment you stated in your decree that Father Luis has been laicized, the media quickly took up the story and published the laicization of Father Luis. Now, that you have come out and admitted your error, do you think the media is going to publish your clarification? The damage has been done, and I am still waiting for the media to publish your clarification. According to an anonymous person who posted in the jungle:

AnonymousDecember 16, 2025 at 7:24 PM

Regardless of whether he thinks Camacho is guilty, he should have given Camacho the benefit of the doubt until Camacho exhausted all his appeal rights. In this case, he knew Camacho intends to file an appeal. So, his announcement about Camacho being laicized was not only premature, but managed to destroy Camacho's reputation on the spot. Any attempt to backpedal not only looks foolish by showing his incompetence, immaturity, and ignorance, but prevented Camacho's reputation from ever being restored in any meaningful way should he win his appeal and reverse the verdict permanently. Camacho may have a civil case for damages.

Clarification from Archbishop Ryan

 You can find the following letter in the Archdiocese of Agana website:

15 December 2025

Some canonical clarifications concerning the case of Rev. Luis Camacho

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

In reference to my “Pastoral Update to the Faithful Regarding the Case of Luis Camacho” with Prot.
No. 02-48 dated December 11, 2025, I wish to make some clarificatory statements for the public to
understand:

1. Rev. Luis Camacho, in all stages of suspension, investigation, and appeal, maintains the right
of due process and innocence in accordance with the norms of Canon Law.

2. The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its letter dated 7 November 2025 with Prot. N.
450/2015 – 107269 stated that Rev. Camacho “is to be informed of his right to present recourse” to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith “within the peremptory time limit of sixty (60) useful days from the date of notification of this Decree.”

3. I acknowledge that I prematurely mentioned in my ‘pastoral update’ that Rev. Camacho “has
been laicized.” The right of appeal has not expired, and Rev. Camacho fully intends to
exercise his right to appeal to the Collegium of the Doctrine of the Faith within sixty (60) days
from the notification of the decree dated 2 December 2025. Therefore, Rev. Camacho is not
dismissed from the clerical state while the recourse is ongoing.

4. In any manner the rights and reputation of Rev. Camacho are infringed by my ‘pastoral
update’ with Prot. No. 02-48 dated December 11, 2025, and inadvertently sent in error, I wish
to state herein the restoration of those rights and reputation. I acted in haste and that my
actions were not intended to cause any harm or scandal to Rev. Camacho, to his family or to
the Archdiocese of Agana.

 
5. Meanwhile, we must wait in prayer for Rev. Camacho and for all of us that, after all the
requirements of canon law are met, we accept the Holy Will of God.

Sincerely in Christ,
+Ryan P. Jimenez, D.D.
Metropolitan Archbishop of Agana

Looking Forward

 A few weeks ago, our youth returned home from Rome and Austria. They shared their experiences of the Pilgrimage, and they are always looking forward. 

2027 is two years away, but the years go by so fast. My family is already looking forward to the next World Youth Day, which will be in South Korea. We have already started saving up for the trip. So, we are looking forward to WYD. It's fortunate for us because we are close to South Korea. The last WYD was in Portugal, which was very far for us. 

In the meantime, the NCW continues to evangelize both in Guam and other Pacific Islands. We hope to produce more vocations especially the priesthood. We already have a few who are studying for the priesthood. These sons of Guam may not be priests in Guam, but they are for the universal Church. We continue to pray for them. 

Pilgrimage to Rome

 The NCW in Guam and Saipan are on their way to Rome for a pilgrimage. Kudos to the youth.

Kiko Meets Pope Leo XIV

 

The Election of Pope Leo XIV

 The following article can be found here.

It is with great joy that the Neocatechumenal Way has received the news of the election of Cardinal Robert Prevost as Successor of Peter. His first words have filled us with joy, placing at the center the Risen Christ, who offers us his peace, and evangelization that springs from a missionary heart.

A particular echo in the hearts of all the brothers and sisters of the Way—and particularly in mine—has been that the election took place on the day of the Supplication to Our Lady of Pompeii, because Our Lady of Pompeii has had a special meaning and presence in the history of the Neocatechumenal Way. In 1968, when the Servant of God Carmen Hernández and I arrived in Rome, we were taken by Don Dino Torreggiani, founder of the “Servants of the Church,” to place at the feet of Our Lady of Pompeii the mission that had begun among the shanties of Palomera Altas, on the outskirts of Madrid. Since then, there have been several events that have significantly accompanied the Way on May 8.

During his episcopal ministry in Peru, he also had the opportunity to meet the team responsible for the Way and to accompany them, as well as to preside over a vocational meeting where he encouraged young people to become missionaries of Christ.

The name he has taken as Successor of Peter, Pope Leo XIV, reminds us that his predecessor, Pope Leo XIII, had to govern the Church in truly difficult times, in defense of Christian identity.

The Way is above all a charism that prioritizes mission through Christian Initiation offered to dioceses and parishes. Concrete signs of this are the thousands of families on mission in the most de-Christianized places, the Redemptoris Mater seminaries, where priests are formed for the New Evangelization and all family and youth ministry. We are happy to be able to continue, with His Holiness, putting all these gifts of the Lord at the service of the Church for the good of humanity, and especially of those “many baptized who end up living… in a de facto atheism,” as Pope Leo XIV recalled in his first homily in the Sistine Chapel.

We assure the Holy Father of our prayers and those of all our brothers so that his ministry may bear all the fruit that people today need.

Kiko Argüello

May 8th, Virgin of Pompeii

Action Speaks Louder Than Words

 The former Archbishop Anthony Apuron has a point. All the bishops and priests who were found guilty of child sexual abuse were defrocked. He was the only exception. He still retained his title of Bishop. The only thing he lost was the Archdiocese. There is no doubt that certain people want to see Apuron step down even BEFORE the sex abuse Scandal broke out. At any rate, Tim Rohr even agreed that the only way to defrock Apuron is through child sexual abuse. According to Rohr (the bold is mine):

TimFebruary 23, 2017 at 4:09 AM

There is no doubt that all of this could have been avoided had the Vatican guys did a bit more homework. Even the noticing of the witnesses was very much slipshod. True, Attorney Lujan also could have done more on his end, but we don't know that he didn't. Maybe he did and he saw that there was nothing to gain by cooperating with Rome. He certainly has every right to distrust the institutional Church.

However, the consequences of a stalemate are exactly as the title states. While Apuron could be reprimanded for his financial misdeeds and his abuse of priests, just to name a few items on a very long list, the only way he could become a candidate for defrocking (laicized), would be through the sex abuse allegations. At 40 years distance, it still is a "he said-he said" situation, no matter how powerful the alleged victims' testimonies may be on paper.

Someone who was with Apuron at that time said that the verdict was a political one. At that time, Theodore McCarrick was found guilty of child sexual abuse and defrocked. That was in February 2019. It was also in February, 2019 just a few days after McCarrick that Apuron was found guilty of the same offense. At that time, the Pope was under tremendous pressure to do something about the clergy sex abuse scandal. Therefore, the verdict may likely have been political, which had nothing to do with justice. 

Unlike Theodore McCarrick, Apuron was not defrocked. Also, McCarrick was never exiled from his home country, but Apuron was exiled. Why do you think that is? Could it be because Apuron's life was threatened, and Pope Francis exiled him for his protection?

There was indeed a climate of fear in Guam.The tires of the former Archbishop were slashed at the Chancery. He was stalked by the people who hated him. They wrote letters to the Vatican, urging them to find him guilty NOW without a canonical trial.

As for the plaintiffs who voluntarily dismissed their case, what was the main reason for the dismissal? One of the primary reasons for dismissing a case is lack of sufficient evidence. One reason that was given was because Apuron had no money or assets to give. This reminded me of the time when Cardinal Burke came to Guam to interview the alleged victims. None of them wanted to speak to Burke. However, when they heard that the Church's ATM was opened, they decided to take the interview. See the story here. Action speaks louder than words.

So, Bishop Anthony Apuron has a point. The fact that he was NOT defrocked and treated differently than the rest of the priests and bishops who were defrocked for the same offense speaks volumes. Unlike Brouillard who was accused of the same offense and defrocked, Apuron was not secluded. He was never told to stay away from children. He was simply told to stay away from Guam. Action speaks louder than words.

Excerpts From PDN

 These are some excerpts taken from the Pacific Daily News:

He issued a video message after plaintiffs initiated proceedings that sought dismissal of cases, according to his attorney. Apuron is required to agree to the dismissal, his counsel said.

He did, and the parties filed a motion that dismisses with prejudice eight clergy sex abuse cases and one defamation case against him. 

 It was the accusers who initiated the dismissal, which is something the jungle chose to ignore. The plaintiffs' attorney said that there's nothing to take from him because he has nothing. Bishop Anthony sold all his assets. But wait!!! 

I was so sure that the accusers were not interested in money, only an apology. Yeah right! If you recall, the moment the former Archbishop declared his innocence, the accusers called him a liar and proceeded to sue him for 2 million dollars. So much for not being interested in money. 🙄 It was the money all along, including their hatred of the former Archbishop and the Neocatechumenal Way. 

The nine cases that were dismissed "included eight allegations of sexual abuse dating back to the 1970s, mostly from former Hågat alter boys and one defamation case."

They backed down. They ran away. Could it be because going through a trial would expose the truth? For example, Roy Quintanilla and Walter Denton both admitted in public media that they thought they were alone. They thought no one knew. But later they admitted that they spoke to Father Jack Niland about the abuse. One of them admitted that another boy was with him. So, their stories changed. They were not alone. Furthermore, Roland Sondia and his family were very close to Father Jack. If Father Jack was truly a child molester, Roland Sondia would also be his victim. However, there are photos showing Sondia visiting Father Jack at the hospital before he passed away. Roy Quintanilla even left a positive comment on Father Jack's obituary.  You can read about it here. 

Roy Quintanilla, Walter Denton, and Roland Sondia claimed they were sexually abused by the former Archbishop Anthony Apuron when he was a priest. Two of them changed their story and said they told Father Jack about the abuse, but there was no record of Father Jack reporting a child sexual abuse.Imagine if all that came out in court.

From Bishop Anthony Apuron