CHANCERY V GOFIGAN: "JUNE" CALLS IN AND TELLS FR. PAUL TO SHUT UP

"June" called in to the Patti Arroyo show and chastised Fr. Paul (who was on the air with Patti via phone) for speaking about his case publicly. 

It's a good bet "June" is a member of the Neocatechumenal Way since she refers to herself as "one of the worst" Catholics, language common to NCW members. And we can expect more "chastising" of Fr. Paul from other members as this case goes forward.

I will tell you why later. But for now, June, let's go over a few things.

Canon Law  (1742 §1) required the Archbishop to first discuss the removal of Fr. Paul with two pastors selected by the presbyteral council. And then, after the discussion, if the Archbishop judges that the pastor must be removed, he is required to first attempt to paternally persuade the pastor to "resign within fifteen days, after having explained, for validity, the cause and arguments for the removal."

The Archbishop DID NONE of these things. 

On July 16, 2013, Fr. Paul was summoned before the Archbishop and told to resign or otherwise endure "a more arduous and painful closure" to his assignment as pastor of Santa Barbara Parish. Does that sound "paternal" to you, June? I don't think so. In fact, that's the language of a mob boss: "arduous and painful". Seriously, June, from a bishop? Who writes this man's letters?

The Archbishop himself then went public with the removal of Fr. Paul with the Aviso published in the U Matuna on July 22. In other words, June, the Archbishop, went public first, and did so with complete disregard for Canon Law. This was a severe violation, not only of Fr. Paul's canonical rights as pastor, but a very mean and vindictive attack on Fr. Paul's character. 

In fact, it goes beyond that, June. Pastors cannot be removed without reason and a juridical process. Thus, the abrupt removal of Fr. Paul was a grave cause for scandal. In fact, the scandal and the damage done to our church would have been greater had not Fr. Paul had the foresight to write a letter to his parishioners explaining the situation and asking for their prayers for both himself and the Archbishop. 

And then, June, the Chancery re-inserted itself into the public sphere on July 22 with a press release (of all things) LYING about Fr. Paul's failure to terminate an employee in 2011*, making further allegations against Fr. Paul, and attempting to defame the subject employee by saying he was a danger to children when 1) his case did not involve children, 2) his crime was committed 32 years ago, and 3) he is now married and the father of two. The Chancery had NO evidence that the man was a danger to children and KNEW that there was no basis for their allegation. They simply chose to make it up. 

*Fr. Paul terminated the man's employment on October 26, 2011, as ordered. If the Chancery did not know this then they are grossly incompetent. 

So you see, June, the Chancery, with premeditation and malice, tried to publicly discredit Fr. Paul twice right at the outset, and you're upset that Fr. Paul responds to questions about this from the media? It's the Archbishop who took this fight public. He just didn't expect Fr. Paul to fight back. Well, he is. And many others are waiting to explode, not so much on Fr. Paul's behalf, his case is just the catalyst!

And you talk about obedience? Fr. Paul's vow of obedience does not include obedience to unjust acts. This is why Canon Law provides for recourse against such administrative decrees. Our church has historically been brutalized and ravaged by unjust prelates who are full of themselves and their power. Thus the Church in her wisdom has written into her laws protections from such men. 

But the real issue here, June, is not Fr. Paul, is it? The real issue is the Neocatechumenal Way. That's why you called in. Fr. Paul began exposing things about the Neo publicly that the rest of us aren't supposed to know, and you didn't like that. So you called in to shut him down. 

You're scared, aren't you, June? You're scared because you know that if the Archbishop goes down, then the Neo goes down. In no place else on earth is the Neo so protected as it is here in Guam. No place else on earth has a multi-million dollar piece of property like Redemptoris Mater Seminary. 

In fact, your Neo leaders, June, have already persuaded the Archbishop to sign it over to them so if something happens to him or when he retires, the Neo keeps the property, not us, not the Archdiocese of Agana, not the people who have been contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars believing (falsely) that this was our seminary. The Archdiocesan Finance Council objected, so the Archbishop fired them all. 

Do you want documentation, June? I have documentation. Go ahead, try to shut up Fr. Paul. Try to shut me up. Go ahead. I only need more reasons like the one you just gave me. 

But I'm not blaming you, June. You were lied to. And you're still being lied to. More to come.