Wednesday, March 21, 2018


The Kikos are not going to give up. It appears that on the morning of the publication of Apuron's sentence, they were still working at the 11th hour...


Guam archbishop guilty of sexual abuse, exiled from island, Vatican tribunal rules

VATICAN CITY — A Vatican tribunal found Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron guilty of sexually abusing minors and decreed he should be removed him from his clerical office and exiled from the island.

[USA TODAY gets it right. Apuron was found GUILTY of sexually abusing minors. Meanwhile, the Kiko-controlled "Catholic" press (e.g. EWTN) has prostituted itself to twist the verdict (sentence) in an apparent attempt to exonerate Apuron saying that "the CDF did not state the charges for which (Apuron) was found guilty," that Apuron was found guilty only of "a minority of the allegations" (as if it was more about mismanagement than sexual abuse), and that based on the penalty (which EWTN tries to make light of) it couldn't have been sexual abuse. I detailed EWTN's mess here.]

The Vatican said in a statement issued Friday that the tribunal had found Apuron "guilty of certain accusations." The tribunal dismissed some of the charges against him.

Apuron is the highest ranking church figure to have been convicted of sexual misconduct. Other high-ranking church officials, such as Boston's Cardinal Bernard Law, were accused of covering up, not participating, in such misconduct.

[This is a critical point that few in the press have picked up on. Apuron's trial and removal is history making.]

Apuron, 72, vowed Friday to appeal the sentence.

“God is my witness; I am innocent and I look forward to proving my innocence in the appeals process,” Apuron said in a statement released by his lawyer.

[The statement was made by Attorney Jackie Terlaje who is is civil lawyer, not his canon lawyer. Why isn't Apuron making a statement through his canon lawyer? There's a reason.]

The sentence would be suspended until such an appeal ends, according to Giorgio Giovanelli, an expert on canonical law with Rome’s Pontifical Lateran University.

[We can be sure that Apuron and the Kikos will exploit every possible crack to undermine the sentence. Meanwhile, it needs to be clear that while Apuron has appealed, that doesn't mean there is one. There is no appeal until the Vatican says there is one, not Apuron or his "attorney."]

The church suspended Apuron as archbishop in June 2016 amid allegations that he had sexually abused altar boys as a parish priest in Agat, Guam, in the 1970s. He denied the accusations and threatened to sue his accusers. 

[Yes, he did. And he threatened to sue me, Tim Rohr, specifically, publicly, and by name.]

Months after the suspension, the Vatican formed a five-member secret tribunal to look into the charges. The only member known to the public is Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, a Wisconsin native.

The tribunal had been scheduled to announce its verdict in August and then again October. But it was delayed as new evidence emerged. 

[The "new evidence" is believed to be accusations from others who did not choose to make their accusations known publicly but instead wrote only to the Vatican. I can say this with some certainty given the people I am privately aware of.]

An investigation by the USA TODAY Network's Pacific Daily News unearthed allegations of decades of assault, manipulation and intimidation by several priests of children reared on this remote, predominantly Catholic U.S. territory. The investigation identified more than 150 lawsuits that describe rampant child sexual abuse by some of Guam’s most revered men. 

[This is not correct. In fact, we can say, with much regret: "if only the press would have done so!" In fact, the failure of the press to do this is why a few lay people had to do it, and at great personal cost. We're thankful to the press for picking up the stories, but there was certainly nothing "unearthed" by any of the press.]

'The Vatican tribunal believed us'

One accuser was Roland Paul L. Sondia, who said Apuron molested him when he was a 15-year-old altar boy in 1977. The verdict, he said, gives him a sense of relief and justice.

“We’ve waited for so long for this day to come,” Sondia said late Friday night on Guam when he learned of the verdict. “The Vatican tribunal believed us, believed what was done to us. I’m still trying to take it all in.”

Sondia, now 56, was with his wife when he heard the news.

“We hugged each other, we were in tears. They’re tears of joy,” said Sondia, who still lives in Agat with his family.

'So glad we stopped being silent'

Roy Quintanilla said he was a 12-year-old altar boy in Agat when he was molested by Apuron about 40 years ago.

“I always believed that the Vatican would find Apuron guilty. How could they not, after our written and personal testimony? This verdict was a long time coming,” said Quintanilla, who now lives in Hawaii.

Quintanilla said Apuron enjoyed the respectable life of an archbishop of Guam for three decades “when he really should never have been bishop in the first place.”

[Quintanilla hits the nail on the head. Apuron never should have been bishop in the first place. And how he became bishop is something the press should really get around to "unearthing" if it wants credit for a real story!]

“Lucky for him, we remained silent all that time," Quintanilla said. "I am so glad we stopped being silent.

"The Vatican’s verdict was made possible because Guam’s faithful stood together against an injustice.  Although it took me 40 years to come forward, I’m glad I did, and I am glad for everyone that came forward to tell their story,” he said.

[Thank you, Roy. It was only because, thanks to a few leaders, that "Guam's faithful stood together against an injustice." The real test is whether we will continue to stand. The Kikos are not going to go away.]

'But it's not over'

Tim Rohr, who blogs about Catholic issues, said that while the Apuron verdict brings a sense of relief, it is not over. He predicted an appeal that could drag on for at least two years. 

[To clarify: there is no appeal unless the Vatican says there is one. But appeal or not, Apuron and the Kikos are not going to go away. Even if the appeal is denied, the Kikos will go into "persecution mode," and cast Apuron as a martyr.]

There is no set timetable for how long an appeal would last, according to Joshua McElwee, Vatican correspondent for National Catholic Reporter.

“It’s not a transparent process,” McElwee said. “We probably won’t know when it starts, or what is happening in an appeal. We will probably only find out what happens when a statement is suddenly released, the way it was for the tribunal’s ruling” on Friday.

[Actually, we will know when it starts because, as of now, Archbishop Byrnes is no longer Coadjutor Archbishop, but fully "Archbishop of Agana." If the Vatican accepts Apuron's appeal, then Byrnes will immediately be required to revert back to Coadjutor.]

The Vatican said the decision of the tribunal would become “final and effective” if the tribunal’s decision is upheld on appeal. Giovanelli, the canonical law expert, said Pope Francis could choose to intervene.

[It appears that Pope Francis has already intervened and caused the sentence to be published when it did - thanks to Apuron's abuse of two papal receiving lines which gave Apuron and the Kikos the photo ops they thought would help. They didn't.]

Apuron, in a wheel chair because of health issues, met with Francis a month ago in Paul VI Hall in the Vatican City. Italian media reports said Francis embraced Apuron and whispered a few words into the archbishop’s ear, but Francis made no public statement about Apuron. 

[We have to assume that the wheel chair is a prop. While Apuron may have been wheeled to the two events where he crashed the two receiving lines (once in January, another in February), he appeared to have no difficulty standing and walking in those lines.]

Francis, who celebrated his fifth anniversary as pontiff March 13, has said repeatedly that the church should take more responsibility for sexual abuse scandals in its past. 

Apuron also faces additional lawsuits. Apuron's nephew Mark Apuron accused him of sexual abuse in a lawsuit filed in January.

Apuron denied the allegations then in a statement: "As I lay sick after another surgery and I face the final judgment approaching evermore close, having lost interest in this world, God is my witness: I deny all allegations of sexual abuse made against me, including this last one."

[Apuron admitted his guilt when he ran after only ONE allegation in May 2016. And since he has concocted a fable about his being persecuted by Chinese casino and real estate interests for his reason for fleeing. Unfortunately, EWTN has continued the fable.]

The Archdiocese of Agana, now led by Archbishop Michael Jude Byrnes, did not offer a comment immediately after the announcement of the verdict. Communications director Tony Diaz said the archdiocese would issue a statement Saturday morning. 

[The statement was issued, saying that the CDF "concretely" found Apuron "guilty."]

David Sablan, president of the grassroots group Concerned Catholics of Guam (CCOG), whose actions helped expose abuses by Apuron, said Catholics on Guam can now "begin the healing process of our wounded church on Guam.”

Sablan said the organization would work with the new archbishop "to strengthen our Church in being true to the teaching of Jesus Christ faithfully. This is now the mission of CCOG and all Catholics on Guam.”

Swift rise to power, rapid fall from grace

Apuron, a former altar boy, rose from priest to archbishop in 14 years. He was installed as the leader of the island's faithful in 1986. His descent from power was also swift.

Initially, the archbishop came under scrutiny after a multimillion-dollar transfer of church property. Then, Apuron became the target of public protests following the removal of two popular priests.

[That's not quite the timeline. It was the Fr. Paul issue first. But these were the seminal events.]

As critics worked to unseat the archbishop, their efforts uncovered a massive child sex abuse scandal.

[Actually, the "massive child sex abuse scandal' "uncovered" itself. Once there was a forum to speak out against Apuron (this blog) it was only a matter of time before those abused by him would find it (this forum). In hindsight, this is why Apuron and his people were so anxious to shut me down. First, by going to Rome to get Cardinal O'Brien, who headed a particular organization I belonged to, to threaten me into silence, then, the public threat to sue me, and finally, the ongoing onslaught from the Kiko's Diana blog. Incidentally, after I responded to O'Brien's threat with a litany of facts about Apuron, I never heard from him again.] 

Early abuse allegation

In late 2014, former Agat altar boy John Toves accused Apuron of sexually abusing a cousin. When the cousin did not come forward, Apuron and the archdiocese threatened to sue Toves.

Then in August 2015, former Agat altar boy Walter Denton wrote in a letter to Vatican officials that he had been raped by Apuron as a child. A few months later, after speaking with Denton and former altar boys Quintanilla and Sondia, blogger Rohr put out a call for anyone who had been abused by a priest to contact him.

Rohr, who has lived on Guam since 1985, said he knew of the swirl of rumors around Apuron.

[Since 1987]

“I already heard about Apuron and the Agat boys," Rohr said in a 2017 interview. "There are always snickers when people talked about Apuron in Agat. There were no names of the boys, but I knew something was going on.”

In early May 2016, full-page ads sponsored by Concerned Catholics of Guam appeared in local newspapers, urging anyone who had been sexually abused by clergy to come forward. 

Quintanilla stood in front of the chancery office to tell his story. He recounted abuse that began in 1976, when he was 12, and Apuron molested him during a sleepover at the rectory in Agat. Hearing his story on the news, Arizona resident Doris Concepcion came forward with her son Joseph A. Quinata's accusation. In 2005, Quinata, as he was being wheeled into surgery, told her he was also molested by Apuron. Quinata did not survive the surgery.

At the time, the former Agat altar boys could not sue Apuron or the church because the statute of limitations had expired on the sexual abuse charges. Instead, after the archbishop called them liars, they sued the archbishop and the church for defamation.

Apuron struck back, declaring the Concerned Catholics of Guam a prohibited society, banning the faithful from associating with the group and threatening lawsuits against his accusers.

Changes in Guam law

The scandal prompted lawmakers to remove the statute of limitations for civil suits involving child victims.The law passed in 2016.

[Not quite. It was once again the laity who organized a campaign to push lawmakers to do so.]

The archdiocese is now named in 159 sex abuse lawsuits.

Monday, March 19, 2018


Quotes from Attorney Jackie Terlaje, Apuron's civil attorney, taken from the KUAM special "Vatican Verdict Part 2". [My comments in red.]

"First of all, I want to emphasize that Archbishop Anthony was acquitted of the majority of charges against him. I think this is an important fact that has been underplayed by many of the media outlets that are out there."

[First of all, why is Apuron's civil attorney "practicing law" by speaking for a person who is represented by other lawyers in a jurisdiction (the Vatican) that she is not authorized to practice in? Second, how does she know that Apuron has been "acquitted of the majority of charges" against him, other than what Apuron told her? Third, regardless of the number of the charges he was accused of, Apuron was indeed found guilty - after a year long trial, and by papal-appointed tribunal of his peers - of at least some charges which were serious enough to remove him from office and banish him for life from residing ever again in his home diocese.]

"There is an appellate process in place, and he has already appealed the finding of guilt."

[As an attorney, Terlaje should know that while Apuron may have requested an appeal, there is no appeal until the Vatican publishes a notice that there is one. And it has not.]

"I was a bit disheartened and disturbed by Coadjutor (Michael) Byrnes' statement. To publicly condemn Archbishop Anthony without having the full information, for me, it's an unjust condemnation of him. We don't know today which of the accusations Archbishop Anthony was found guilty of."

[First, Byrnes is no longer "Coadjutor." He is Archbishop of Agana, which is how he signed his press release of March 17. In the same press release, Archbishop Byrnes addressed Apuron as "Bishop Apuron," NOT "Archbishop Apuron," which denotes Apuron's removal from office.]

"I don't even know what the grounds of appeal are. I'm not a canon lawyer, so I can't even tell you what Archbishop Anthony has the ability to appeal on. His canon lawyers are the ones handling that entire process, and this is the nature of the Vatican process as well - that we don't have information."

[This is what Terlaje should have said at the outset and cut if off at that: 1) "I'm not a canon lawyer;" 2) "I can't tell you (comment);" 3) "we" (I) don't have information." Anything beyond this could be construed as an unauthorized practice of law.]

"Archbishop Anthony has been consistently praying for the people of Guam. He has been consistently asserting his innocence. And he has been praying that this suffering, this problem, this hurt that we have on this island is healed."

[There's only one problem. Apuron RAN.]

"The reality of the that this particular verdict doesn't necessarily have a very big impact on the civil case."

[That's not what Terlaje herself said on June 13, 2017: "Terlaje told the judge the outcome of the canonical trial would impact the direction of the civil cases."]

[But there should be some sympathy for Terlaje. After all, she is a lawyer, and a lawyer's first duty is to his or her client. It's a tough job. Sometimes they have to defend the indefensible. She's just doing her job.]



Archbishop Byrnes will be holding a press conference today at 1:30. We will attempt to pull in the live feed here on this post.

In the meanwhile, we can guess a bit at what he is going to say given his press statement over the weekend where he refers to former Archbishop Apuron as only "Bishop Apuron," 

...and signs the press release "Michael Byrnes Archbishop of Agana" and not "Coadjutor Archbishop" as before.

BTW, The Diana appears to be all in a twit as to how we got a copy of the press release. Maybe it's because JW is considered a legitimate media outlet because its author uses his real name. Try it, Diana. 



Sunday, March 18, 2018



Apuron's rapid rise, swift descent from power

After more than four decades as a priest, including 30 as the spiritual leader of Catholics on Guam, Archbishop Anthony Apuron learned he would be stripped of his office and prohibited from living on the island where he'd spent most of his life. CONTINUED

The part about the RMS property scam is copied below:

In 2002, the archdiocese used a $1.9 million loan to purchase the former 100-room Accion Hotel on 19 acres in Yona for a seminary, according to Pacific Daily News files. In a donation that was supposed to be anonymous, a group of Carmelite nuns raised $2 million to pay off the loan, giving the archdiocese full title to the property, the building and its contents.

The Redemptoris Mater Seminary was affiliated with the Neocatechumenal Way, and in 2011 seminary representatives asked the archdiocese finance council to transfer the title of the property to the seminary. After the finance council denied the request, Apuron signed a deed restriction, allowing the property to be held by the seminary indefinitely.

Apuron then dissolved the finance council.

The seminary was “specifically designed to form presbyters for the ‘New Evangelization’ as understood by the Neocatechumenal Way,” according to a report issued in September 2016 by the archdiocese. “As a result the seminarians’ formation does not prioritize the importance of parish ministry, parish management and the general familiarity of the seminarians with parish life.”


Throughout the ETWN news story, there was the consistent mention of an unnamed source who was curiously "close" to several parts of Apuron's case: 1) the case itself and thus close to Apuron, 2) close to the goings on in the Archdiocese of Agana, and 3) close to EWTN.

And well, well, well, it appears that it may be our old disappearing friend, The Wandering Wadeson, who, while not apparently assigned to this parish just down the road from EWTN headquarters, is nevertheless operating in the area. 

So perhaps it is time to review the Wadeson File. For now just find his name on the labels in the right side bar. I'll assemble a more thorough file soon. 

Full bulletin

Irondale, Alabama. EWTN headquarters

Saturday, March 17, 2018


The "in-the-tank-for-Kiko" EWTN media is a disgrace to the memory of Mother Angelica who fought so hard to bring us truth. EWTN's whole article is an absolute sham, as I clearly demonstrated in a previous post

To further illustrate the sham EWTN has become, compare what EWTN said with what the Vatican itself said. 

EWTN tries to convince us that the charges against Apuron not only are not known, but probably didn't even involve sex abuse:

Meanwhile, here is what the Vatican itself published:



The Holy See has made its determination in the canonical trial of Bishop Anthony S. Apuron and has issued a news release through its Vatican press office.

The official news release issued March 16, 2018 by the Apostolic Tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reads as follows:

“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. [00436-EN.01]”

It has been a long and painful period for our Church and our island community in general. This long awaited announcement by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is very much welcomed. It is a monumental marker in our journey toward healing as one Church, one people in God. I pray that all people would embrace this call for healing.

Though the sentence is subject to appeal by Bishop Apuron, as indicated by the Vatican news release, the Apostolic Tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has clearly and concretely determined a finding of “guilty” regarding “certain of the accusations” made against him.

I extend my prayers as well as gratitude to the courageous individuals and their families who came forward to share their agonizing stories of being abused by then Father Tony Apuron in years past: Mr. Roy Quintanilla, Mr. Walter Denton, Mr. Roland Paul Sondia, and the late Joseph “Sonny” Quinata, represented with deep love by his mom Doris Concepcion.

I offer prayers and thanks as well to Mark M. Apuron, for his brave decision to come forward regarding his uncle.

Regardless of whether there is an appeal or not, our focus shall remain on penance and reparation. I expect to hold a news conference on Monday, March 19, 2018. We shall advise the media on the time. For now, this will be the extent of our message.

+Michael Byrnes
Archbishop of Agana


KUAM: Archbishop Byrnes encourages Catholics to "embrace call for healing"

The Archdiocese of Agana welcomes the verdict issued by the Holy See on Guam’s suspended Archbishop Anthony Apuron. 

In a press release on Saturday, Coadjutor Archbishop Michael Byrnes states “It is a monumental marker in our journey toward healing as one Church, one people in God. I pray that all people will embrace this call for healing.”

As reported, a papal bulletin on Friday announced a guilty verdict for Apuron for “certain of the allegations” against him resulting in his removal and prohibiting him from returning to Guam.

Though Apuron has expressed intent to appeal the sentence, the local Archdiocese states it will push forward with penance and reparation.  

A news conference will be held on Monday where Archbishop Byrnes will make further comment.
Until then, he extends his prayers and thanks to the five victims and their families for having the courage to share their agonizing stories of abuse by Apuron.


It has been very evident for a long time that Catholic media giant, EWTN, after Mother Angelica retired, has been increasingly taken over by amateurs. Additionally, they have been increasingly Kiko-friendly, and today's report about Apuron proves it. In fact, it is not only pathetically Kiko-friendly reporting, it is the stuff of gossip tabloids. My comments in [red.] And see how many times EWTN refers to an unnamed source (just like La Stampa) which I'll underline.

Update: Guilty verdict for Guam archbishop, appeal to follow

On Friday the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announced the conclusion of a year-long trial against an archbishop in Guam, stating that he has been found guilty of some charges stemming from allegations of sexual abuse of minors and has been removed from office. 

A source close to the case has confirmed that the archbishop has already appealed the decision. 

[So, here we start with the unnamed source, who, throughout the rest of the article, appears to be the sole source.]

According to a March 16 statement from the Apostolic Tribunal of the CDF, Archbishop Anthony Apuron, 72, was found guilty of “certain” accusations and penalized with removal from the office and prohibition from residing within the Archdiocese of Guam.

The CDF did not state the charges for which the archbishop was found guilty. Sources close to the case told CNA that the archbishop was found guilty of a minority of the allegations leveled against him.

[Huh? Did EWTN even bother to read the actual Vatican bulletin? The Vatican clearly stated: "The canonical trial of minors, brought against the Most Reverend Anthony Sablan APURON, OFMCap., Archbishop of Agaña, Guam." But EWTN tells us that the charges were not even stated. SMH!]

If the archbishop has been found guilty of sexual abuse of minors, the penalty leveled against him is unusual - often a cleric found guilty of such crimes would be "laicized," or removed from the clerical state, sources say.

[Again, with the "sources say." How much you wanna bet the "sources" are Kiko's? And we don't know if Apuron will eventually be laicized. That could be still to come. However, laicization is overstated. It is no punishment at all. In fact, it is a free pass to the accused as he would no longer be under the authority of the Church. At least keeping him a cleric keeps Rome in control.]

Sources also noted that the archbishop has seemingly maintained his ecclesiastical faculties, and though restricted from residence in Guam, is apparently able to exercise ministry as a priest.

[More "sources." But the statement is stupid. The removal of faculties, especially of a bishop, since it is something only a pope can do, required an investigation. So while Apuron was being investigated, he, of course, retained his faculties as a priest. And now that the trial has concluded, part of the deal may be that Apuron's faculties will be removed but that this part of the sentence would not be made public, or that he may be permitted to retain limited faculties. We don't know, and the Vatican was not required to tell us.]

A source close to the case told CNA that the penalty is "a complete contradiction" to the sentence.

The source said that if the archbishop is guilty of sexual abuse against minors, "justice would demand the strongest possible penalty," adding "this punishment maintains the status quo."  
["A source..." So pathetic EWTN. But here's the deal. Apuron has received the worst of penalties: EXILE. Even the laicized Wesołowski was permitted to return to his home. Not so, Apuron. Apuron has been banished from Guam by the pope himself. No one else has ever received such a penalty.]

One expert suggested to the CNA that the five-judge panel may have been divided on the archbishop's guilt, which could explain the disparity between a guilty verdict and an unusually light sanction.

[Wow! "an unusually light sanction." Ummm. IT WAS BANISHMENT AND EXILE FOR LIFE, not to mention the first EVER archbishop to be removed from his diocese by a trial!]

One source questioned whether pressure to quickly resolve the matter might have influenced the sentence.

Cardinal Raymond Burke, former prefect of the Vatican's Apostolic Signatura, is the case's only judge to be publicly identified.

"It is difficult to explain how such a serious-minded and competent canonist would put his name to something like this," a source close to the case said of Burke, noting questions raised about the sentence and delays in the case's adjudication. 

[It's hard to comment on this pathetic tabloid reporting with any seriousness. All we have is "the source, the source, the source." Ummm, EWTN, we are on to you. Those are Kiko's people. We can smell them all the way over here! And to call into question Cardinal Burke's integrity....? Yah, right. SMH. SMH. SMH.]

Apuron was relieved of his pastoral and administrative authority by Pope Francis in 2016, in the wake of the allegations, and was effectively replaced by Coadjutor Archbishop Michael Byrnes, formerly of Detroit.

The canonical trial against Apuron began in October 2016, with Cardinal Burke appointed by Pope Francis as the trial’s presiding judge. Byrnes told reporters that the Vatican reached a decision on the case in October 2017, though no information regarding its outcome had yet been released.

Sources questions why the CDF delayed finalizing sentences apparently completely in mid-2017. The archbishop is reported to have been notified of the court's decision only recently, and it was not made publicly known until today.

One source close to the Archdiocese of Agana in Guam questioned whether Archbishop Byrnes pushed the Vatican to release the sentence in order to resolve public concern about the matter in Guam. 

However, the source questioned whether Byrnes has been appropriately advised on the matter. "Most of the people who were opposed to [Apuron] in terms of governance" have become advisers to Byrnes, the source said.

"The curial advice Byrnes is receiving is institutionally and personally opposed to Apuron."

[This is getting crazy. Ummmm, EWTN, Byrnes' immediate right hand man is Fr. Jeff ("I love my archbishop") San Nicolas who defended Apuron to the end and still defends him. But how pathetic you people are to insult Archbishop Byrnes. On second thought, thanks for that. This will help Byrnes make some decisions that we want to see him make!]

In the early hours of March 17 on Guam, Apuron released a statement through his attorney.

"I have been informed of the conclusion of the first instance canonical trial against me. While I am relieved that the tribunal dismissed the majority of the accusations against me, I have appealed the verdict. God is my witness; I am innocent and I look forward to proving my innocence in the appeals process," the statement read.

"Today, my prayers are with the Church in Guam, which has been suffering greatly. I pray that Santa Marian Kamalen may intercede for the healing of our island," Apuron continued.

[Note. Why did Apuron release this message through his civil attorney who has NOTHING to do with Apuron's canonical trial? The fact is, as I have stated elsewhere, that it wasn't just Cardinal Burke or the tribunal which found Apuron GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY. It was Pope Francis himself, without whose consent, no trial could have ever commenced in the first place and certainly no verdict or sentence could have ever been pronounced. So EWTN, your problem is with Francis, isn't it.]

Until appeals are resolved, “the imposed penalties are suspended until the final resolution” of the trial, according to the CDF.  

A source told CNA that the credibility of the witnesses will be a major factor of the appeal. Questions have been raised regarding connections between the witnesses, attorneys, and real estate developers on Guam.

[Now, that's a dead giveaway. The appeal has only to do with the proceedings of the trial and nothing to do with the "credibility of the witnesses" as that has already been established in the trial itself. And LOL, again with the real estate developers. Pathetic. You're as bad as the trained lawyer.]

The prefect of the CDF, Archbishop Luis Ladaria, will determine whether or not to accept the appeal, and then be responsible for appointing judges to consider it.

[Ummm, EWTN, Ladaria already signed off on the verdict and sentence, which is how it was promulgated. The appeal is a matter of form, and it is just your neocat friends one last chance to save their cult.]

The most recent allegation against Apuron was made Jan. 10 by the archbishop’s nephew, Mark Apuron. He filed a lawsuit Jan. 10 claiming that his uncle raped him in a Church bathroom in 1989 or 1990. This was the fifth lawsuit to accuse the archbishop of sexual abuse of minors during his time as a pastor and bishop.

The archbishop denied the allegations in a statement Jan. 18, writing, “God is my witness: I deny all allegations of sexual abuse made against me, including this last one,” according to Guam Pacific Daily News.

In addition to this claim, Apuron also faced four other accusations from former altar boys, who charged the archbishop with abuse in the 1970s when he served as a parish priest in Agat.

The first allegations against the archbishop were made public in May 2016. Mark’s attorney, David Lujan, said that his client was too ashamed and embarrassed to tell his family about the alleged abuse until recently.

[EWTN here is trying to infer that Mark Apuron was put up to it because he did not come out until a year and half later. It's important that they try to do this because it was very likely Mark Apuron's testimony which was the clincher in the trial, not because Mark was Apuron's nephew, but because the incident occurred while Apuron was archbishop.]

Archbishop Byrnes, who is empowered by the Vatican to oversee the Archdiocese of Agana but has not yet formally succeeded Apuron, has since implemented new child protection policies in the archdiocese, including a safe environment program that Byrnes said will “help to instigate a change of culture in our Archdiocese.”

Byrnes adopted in February 2017 the US bishops’ conference’s Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People and its essential norms on dealing with allegations of sexual abuse of minors by clerics.

The Archdiocese of Agaña is currently a defendant in 96 sexual abuse lawsuits, involving Apuron, 13 priests, a Catholic schoolteacher, a Catholic school janitor, and a Boy Scout leader. Most of the lawsuits were filed after 2016, when Guam’s territorial legislature eliminated the statute of limitations for civil lawsuits involving child sexual abuse.

[They can't even get that right. We passed the 100 mark months ago. Yesterday's PDN tallied the number at: "the archdiocese has been named in 159 sex abuse lawsuits." And "most of the lawsuits...filed after 2016?" Ummm, no. ALL of the lawsuits "involving child sex abuse" were filed after September 2016 because there was NO LAW permitting anyone to file a suit until then.]



The following is as found in today's Guam Daily Post:
Apuron, in a statement issued by his attorney Jacqueline Taitano Terlaje, stated: 
"I have been informed of the conclusion of the first instance canonical trial against me.   While I am relieved that the tribunal dismissed the majority of the accusations against me, I have appealed the verdict. God is my witness; I am innocent and I look forward to proving my innocence in the appeals process." 
"Today, my prayers are with the Church in Guam, which has been suffering greatly. I pray that Santa Marian Kamalen may intercede for the healing of our island."
It is instructive to note that Apuron is making this statement through his civil attorney and not his canonical attorneys. In fact, he has not made any statement through his canonical attorneys but instead always defaults to the "trained lawyer." Now why would that be?

Could it be because his canonical attorneys don't want anything to do with defending Apuron other than what they were assigned to do? Could it be that they know Apuron's case is hopeless and they do not want to violate their consciences as apparently some civil attorneys have no problem doing?

In any event, Apuron is GUILTY, GUILTY GUILTY! A panel of five judges found Apuron GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY! And before the sentence could be announced, the whole Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith AND THE POPE had to sign off on it. 

You won't find the pope's signature on anything, but nothing like this can happen without his approval. At any time Francis could have stopped the proceedings or even pardoned Apuron. Yet, he did not. 

Understand that the verdict of GUILTY is from Francis himself.

In fact, it may well have been Apuron's last two attempts at photo ops with Francis (a la crashing papal receiving lines) is what prompted the timing of yesterday's announcement. 

There had been some speculation that the Vatican did not want to influence the civil mediation proceedings and was going to wait till after that had been decided before announcing the verdict. 

However, it appears that Francis may have believed that he was used after all of the gushing press Apuron received in La Stampa, and just said the "h-ll with this," and issued the order to announce the verdict. 

As for the appeal, well, of course, it's all Apuron and his neocat-handlers have. Don't forget, this is really about saving Kiko's Cult, not Apuron.

However, an appeal can only review the proceedings of the trial. New evidence cannot be introduced. And since this was such a high profile case, the first ever archbishop to be tried, and because it was a trial by his peers, we can bet that the Vatican was super meticulous in its handling of this case and that there is nothing to appeal. 

Also, the Vatican is extremely aware of the entire world watching how they handle this because of how badly sex abuse by clerics has been handled in the past. So, we can super bet that they did not mishandle this case in any way. 

And, by the way, Apuron can file an appeal, but that doesn't mean there is one. It will have to meet several conditions first before the Vatican will entertain it, and it will be the same five judges who have already found him GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY. 

Friday, March 16, 2018



And does God have a sense of humor. Guilty sentence announced on (Guam Time) March 17, the Feast of St. Patrick, patron saint of the now-defunct RMS, and the very day Fr. Luis Camacho was arrested in Agat. Agat, the place of all of Apuron's horrors. 

It is also fitting that today is St. Patrick's day, given, as legend has it, that the fabled saint once drove all the snakes off an island. (Except in our case, it is not "all"...yet.)

A Vatican tribunal has found Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron, who was accused of sexual abuse, guilty of “certain of the accusations” against him, and removed him from office.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announced the verdict on Friday and imposed upon the archbishop “the penalties of privation of office and prohibition of residence in the Archdiocese of Guam”.
Archbishop Apuron has headed the Archdiocese of Agaña since 1986.
A source told The Catholic Herald that Archbishop Apuron will appeal the verdict, and remains Archbishop of Agaña while he does so.
The accusations against the archbishop ranged from the most serious allegations of child abuse to less serious accusations. The CDF rejected most of the accusations, and has not revealed which ones he is guilty of.
The archbishop denies all accusations against him.
This story is developing

ROME — A Vatican tribunal has found Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron, who had been accused of sexually abusing young men decades ago, "guilty of certain of the accusations," imposing a penalty of removal from office and a prohibition from living on the U.S. island territory.

A five-judge apostolic tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announced its verdict in Apuron's canonical case March 16 with a brief press release. The release did not specify of which exact acts the archbishop had been found guilty.

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.  

Francis named an apostolic administrator to run the archdiocese for several months and then named Coadjutor Archbishop Michael Byrnes, a former auxiliary bishop of Detroit, to take over.

As coadjutor, Byrnes would automatically become full archbishop of the archdiocese with Apuron's removal from office. But the doctrinal congregation's statement made clear that Apuron still has the right to appeal the ruling, and that during such an appeal the penalties against the archbishop are suspended.

U.S. Cardinal Raymond Burke, a noted canon lawyer, has served as the presiding judge in the Vatican's canonical trial.

Apuron, 72, has been accused of having inappropriate physical contact with at least five young boys. The allegations emerged in May 2016 when one of the boys, now in his 50s, came forward, prompting others to do the same.

Apuron has denied the allegations against him, and Guam civil authorities have not charged him with any crimes.

The Guam archbishop was spotted in Rome in February, when he was seen in a wheelchair during a weekly Wednesday audience with Francis. Several outlets reported at the time that Apuron greeted the pope and told him: "Holy Father, I wanted to see you before I die."

ANSA EN VATICAN: Guam archbishop found guilty (2)
Anthony Sablan Apuron stripped of office vaticano-condena-arcebispo-de-guam-por-pedofilia.htm

Thursday, March 15, 2018


Recently, a bill limiting abortions to 20 weeks gestation was introduced in the Legislature. As expected, Guam's top abortion provider is opposing it and we appreciate the opposition as it gives us an opportunity to once again push the issue into view. 

Freeman apparently feels he can simply bully the people of Guam. Per the Guttmacher Institute:
"24 states impose prohibitions after a certain number of weeks; 17 of these states ban abortion at about 20 weeks post-fertilization or its equivalent of 22 weeks after the woman’s last menstrual period on the grounds that the fetus can feel pain at that point in gestation."
If 24 states can impose prohibitions after a certain number of weeks, and 17 have already passed bans at 20 weeks, then why not the people of Guam?

Freeman and his pro-aborts will argue that some of those bans have been challenged. So what. The Supreme Court once ruled that white men could own black men (Dred Scott, 1857).

As for abortions going up after restrictions, Freeman ignores Guam's own facts. Since 2008 and the beginning of the efforts of The Epseransa Project, 8 public laws restricting and/or regulating abortion have been enacted:

And abortions overall have gone down:

To be continued

Wednesday, March 14, 2018


While there is much to report on re the MISSOURI MANEUVER, the Board of Ed., The Every Child Act and Jon Fernandez' apparent "epiphany," I must put off discussion of those important matters  momentarily while I deal with the emergency created by Lizzy's candidacy.  Lizzy's throwing her hat in the ring has sent me back to my bulging correspondence file and the catacombs of JungleWatch for material to remind all of the job Lizzy has done this time around.

There's more in first of this series at FROM BOB


Just a couple of notes here:

- The "me too" victims were adults. They knowingly got together with the Cosby's and the Weinstein's et al. The people I am defending ARE innocent altar boys, just wanting to serve God. 11, 12 year olds. NO COMPARISON.

- "One’s faith shouldn’t be in the Church, Rohr says". I would never say that. The "Church" is the Bride of Christ. I believe I said "church leadership," which is what I always say. But even then that has to be nuanced. There is the "leadership" that is the magisterial teaching authority that transmits the deposit of faith as given to the apostles by Jesus, which transcends the mere human "leadership" of this or that pope or bishop.

Tuesday, March 13, 2018



While JungleWatch has been mostly focused on the local church drama, the blog was originally dedicated to "watching the jungle," that is our general social milieu, and commenting on it. One of the most astute "watchers" (and workers) over the years has been former Senator Bob Klitzkie. Recently Bob has begun his own blog to engage the "goings-on" in our community and we at JungleWatchNation encourage you to make a daily check of Bob's blog FROM BOB

Monday, March 12, 2018


My note: This blog receives many emails and inquiries from former members of the NCW. Most simply want to quietly encourage us in what we do on this blog. Some, from time to time have permitted us to publish their accounts. But ALL do not want their names to be known. That alone should speak loudly to us. Where else does one find such fear of retaliation from what is supposed to be an authentically Church-sanctioned group? One which brags "The Holy Spirit accompanies us! Jesus goes before us!" (This blog post may be downloaded as a PDF here.)

By Anonymous

The Holy Spirit accompanies us!
 Jesus goes before us!

Anyone who has been to a neocatechumenate catechesis or been a member of a neocatechumenate community will recognise these words. These are the fundamental claims to authenticity and justification for the neocatechumenate to claim it is inspired by God, that it must obey God and be faithful to the charism given by God. Ultimately this has led to the NCW’s disobedience to the Pope, the Magisterium and to legitimate church authorities. 

The outcome is being witnessed worldwide and has been well publicised
that a major division has been created within the church 
which would certainly
 not be a fruit of the Holy Spirit! 
Some neocatechumenate members claim that 
wherever Jesus is proclaimed division is caused 
because the people listening are forced to make a decision for or against Jesus. 

This is certainly true BUT when the statement is made in relation to the Church it is very different.  The inference here, in relation to the Church, is that the Church is not in communion with Jesus and the NCW knows better than the Church. This conclusion would never be stated directly but implied through such subtle statements. Unfortunately many community members are taken in and seduced by such subtle inferences without considering  exactly what is being said.

I invite members of the NCW to consider carefully how their membership of the organisation is giving mandate to the NCW leadership to exert influence in and on the Church in ways undisclosed to them but of great concern to the Church. As members are you aware of this and are you consulted or kept informed of exactly what Kiko is doing? 

If you became aware that the organisation had been infiltrated by politically motivated leaders and was involved in dishonest, criminal and subversive activities would you still be happy to offer your mandate? 

Here is an extract from  “Life every day” by Jeff Lucas  that gives some insight into the methods of evangelisation used by some christian movements. Some similarities can be found here to the methods employed by the NCW.

There is no doubt that many people, including myself, have benefitted from the Way and many “good fruits” are being seen. It is true that The Holy Spirit accompanies the Way. The fundamental question is does this guarantee authenticity and benefit the Church? Most individuals at parish level in the NCW have little insight into the reality of the Way’s influence within the Church. They will only see the local picture and the information they are allowed to receive through the official channels of the Way. This information would be favourably biased to emphasise the Way’s good fruit while filtering out as much negative news as possible. 

The official NCW line would be to suppress information about  involvement in the: 
Vatileaks scandal 
or the 
Fraudulent misappropriation of church assets 
($40million in just one Guam property!)note 1
Being caught trying to slip approvals past Pope Benedict by devious means.
or the use of 
Spreading of misleading information to divert attention from the truth 
infiltration by Communist ideology
( note 2 
or anarchists 
( note 3.

 Kiko  preaches about the evil of the internet as the internet challenges his control and ability to limit member’s access to information and to manipulate what he wants them to know. (and what he doesn’t want them to know)

After many years as a member of the NCW and reaching the final stage of election, I can personally confirm that I was completely convinced that I was on the right path. I was addicted to the emotional highs from the weekly eucharist and the belief that I was on a way of personal conversion leading to sainthood with the approval of the Pope and the Church. 
I had a powerful conversion experience at the outset and became increasingly exposed to devotions and practices of the church. At first sight and according to my rational judgement  all seemed good and I could have been considered a zealot of the Way. All the members of the community were making personal progress in their spiritual life, as was I.

However certain unsavoury matters started to come to my attention and this eventually led to the opening of my eyes to the reality of what I was part of leading to my decision to leave. Making the decision to leave meant leaving all the people I had been closely associated with for over 20 years and starting out again by myself. I pray everyday for my friends in the Way that they will have their eyes opened too. Unfortunately they are probably like I was,  just looking inwardly at themselves and not considering the bigger picture. I was for the most part unaware of the reality at the top of the Way’s organisation and now I am ashamed that I allowed myself to be manipulated into supporting it. 

Some of the many unsavoury matters would be:

Witnessing Kiko shouting at a young African who was standing up at a vocational meeting in Porto San Giorgio 
“hurry up before I kick you in the head!”(original in Spanish)
witnessing international catechists laughing and approving of Kiko’s outburst.

Claims that the charisms are now with the laity and NCW catechists are      
true apostles. (note 4)

Bullying and hectoring members in an attempt to prevent any questioning or dissention. 

Little regard for those with mental illness
 or risk of suicide. (I have witnessed 5 suicides in the Way)

Blatant self promotion by the NCW and denigration of any opposition including Church hierarchy.

Misrepresentation of the facts to cover up misappropriation of assets & funds etc.

Moving the goal posts to keep NCW members bound in by continually extending the time needed to be in the Way. The NCW statutes say 10 years to complete the way. Actual experience can be up to 30 years. At the end of the way members are not freed to return to their parish but are bound to their communities.

In Conclusion.

As part of the covenants I have made I am making members of the Way aware of the reality so that they can repent (think again), convert (change direction and come back to the Church), and withdraw their mandate to the Way.

Note 1. This is the most famous example of misappropriation of assets but many parish cheque books are being misused worldwide.

Note 2.. Prof G Genarini is a member of an US Eastern seaboard Italian family. He has been the national catechist of the NCW in the USA and has been tipped to succeed Kiko.

Note 3.  A number of the 72 elected by Kiko are reported to have had association with the Red Brigades including a previous member of the UK national team, Fr M Pello.

Note 4.  NCW catechists ultimately believe that  Bishops must obey them. They delight in compromising churchmen in authority in order to exercise control over them. 

Recommendations by JungleWatch