Wednesday, January 8, 2014


In much of what has been posted on this blog, relative to the issues in the Archdiocese of Agana, we really have had to do nothing more than repost what the Chancery and members of the Neocatechumenal Way have said and done themselves. The comments and posts on their behalf have been so unguarded and with little thought to their consequence that once Fr. Paul's case comes before the Congregation for the Clergy in Rome, the tribunal will have all it needs by simply keeping an eye on this blog.

The following comment is such an example:

Father Paul asserts in his letter that he did terminate the employee. However, our investigation has revealed that the person continued to have an active presence at the parish as a volunteer. The person had keys to the facilities and had an active role on church grounds in different keys. 
The matter of the KEYS is the archdiocese solid evidence against Father Paul. 
If the man was terminated and keys were returned then fine. If the keys were still in his possession then it is a different story. 
I have heard Father Paul's sermons on different occasions within different parishes and what he says catches my wholehearted attention. He is a man who is very spiritual and compassionate . Good luck to you Father Paul. My prayers will be that Rome hears the cry of all people who are backing you up.

Disregard the last paragraph. It is obviously insincere since the commenter is unaware enough to give his identity away by saying "our investigation." Obviously he is one of the chancery insiders bent on ridding Guam of Fr. Paul. 

It is actually difficult to further comment on this comment without using the word "stupid" - given the level of influence and possibly governance this person has in the archdiocese - so we'll resort to "incredulous". 

It is INCREDULOUS that a person inside the investigation would even think of equating the possession of keys to a contract of employment. And on THIS rests the Archbishop's WHOLE CASE! Here's why it is incredulous:

The original order from the Vicar General in 2011, as per the Archbishop's letter to Fr. Paul of 16 July 13 demanding his resignation, was an order for Fr. Paul to "release him" - referring to the registered sex offender who had been employed at Santa Barbara parish. (We must state again that the offense was committed 33 years ago and did not involve children - a lie the chancery has worked hard to have us believe.)

A parish volunteer is just that, a volunteer. In no way would he or she be bound to the parish in such as way that would require him or her to be "released". Release, used here, can only refer to a contract of employment. The man, of course was immediately "released", as per the Vicar General's order, and as evidenced in Fr. Paul's letter of termination to the employee of 26 Oct 11.  Release means termination of employment. Period. If more was required, then it was the Vicar General's responsibility to make that clear. There is no evidence that he did.

The chancery needs to remember that this case will be tried before a tribunal in Rome. This is a real court case, with real judges. In the secular world, no attorney would even take the chancery's case given that their only evidence against Fr. Paul is that the terminated person continued to have keys. This is simply laughable. 

Next, we have what Fr. Paul has already clarified, that he often gave the man keys to this or that door when Fr. Paul needed assistance. Just because a father gives his son the keys to get something out of his car doesn't mean he is employed by the father or owns the car. 

Also, we can easily assume that many parish volunteers have keys or at least access to them (e.g. CCD teachers to open classrooms, etc.). This does not make them employees or even "de facto" employees (as the chancery is now trying to claim about the subject person in the Gofigan case.) We can just imagine the tribunal judges peering over their spectacles at the archdiocese' attorney - if they can find one - saying: "Really??"

The commenter/investigator also says that they have "solid evidence". First of all, this stinks of all the maliciousness against Fr. Paul that so many have assumed: that the chancery has OTHER MOTIVES for getting rid of Fr. Paul. 

Really? "Solid evidence"?? 

So you admit that you've been snooping around for two whole freaking years laying your traps for Fr. Paul? 

Why the hell didn't you just call up Fr. Paul and tell him that you didn't want the man to have any access to keys or to be around the parish? Why did you spend two years building up "solid evidence"? How stupid do you think we are out here? What a bunch of clowns!

And who is going to testify? We would like to see them? It's obvious the chancery was working with a MOLE at Santa Barabara. Come out of your hole. Show us who you are. Never mind, we'll smell you out. Just like we're doing with your chancery handlers. Talk about STENCH!

P.S. And even though this was not officially part of Bishop Covolo's recent business on Guam, we'll make sure he gets a copy. 


  1. Replies
    1. What is even more incredulous is that if they waited for two years snooping up evidence, then the archbishop was not really concern about the so called "danger" of the "volunteer's" presence to the community because if he was, why wait for TWO LONG YEARS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT? So all of the statements coming out of the Archbishop via the Chancery about his concern of the youth and members of the parish community were PURE HOGWASH! Incredible indeed. The archbishop and his henchmen should all be fired for destroying and ruining the good name of a good priest. It is hard to pray for people like the archbishop but pray we will so that he can be illuminated by the Holy Spirit to see the error of his ways and the grave harm he has caused to the Church in Guam.

    2. The ones that are most hardest to want to pray for are the ones who most likely need the most prayer! I know I will be praying for him most especially!

  2. When one chooses to get involved in deceitfulness, lies and fraud, one ultimately sinks into doo doo and commits fatal mistakes that consequently reveal their crookery. Because crime does not pay.

    Some at the Chancery are not too bright (it is quite apparent) as they continue their feeble attempt to rationalize their unconscionable and guileful actions against Fr. Gofigan and even insult the intelligence of members of this diocese in this attempt!

    1. If the archbishop wanted Fr. Paul out of Santa Barbara, then transfer him to another parish. But by concocting a lie to force him out and without telling Fr. Paul his next assignment(or assuring him that he will have some kind of future) reveal a depraved mind and soul. The archbishop not only wanted him firing him....but they wanted Fr. Paul to know that his security, his future solely depends on the archbishop's good will, and so be a good boy and obey. Such depravity! Such maliciousness! The whole episode stank and showed a total lack of depravity.


    1. Another lottery pull, for mission families to go evangelize. Maybe the NCW should do the same here and have Neo Families throw their names in the basket and have a lottery too. Maybe it's time to pick up and do what you are suppose to do. Be lay missionaries in other countries who do not not about Christianity. If lay missionaries can come here why not you.

    2. I heard the archbishop along with the NEO leaders are slowly pulling out missionary families and sending them elsewhere...I guess they are slowly cleaning house before inspection arrives.

    3. Did anyone notice any billboards up lately? Guess we probably won't have any commercials in church. Then again I hate to hear boring sob stories. Same same all the time. My marriage, children,addiction, sexuality, always the scenario. Maybe the invitation to the way will be low keyed this time round. I sure would like the hear the Archbishop's story,oops wrong word...his testimony.

    4. neo are protected in the Vatican , in the center in Galilee regularly host house important bishops and cardinals , some examples

      card. Filoni Prefect of the Congregation for Evangelization
      card. Marc Ouellet Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops
      card. Canizares Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments
      card. Rylko President of the Council of Laity
      card. Schonborn Archbishop of Vienna
      card. O'Malley Archbishop of Boston
      card. Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia
      card. Rouco Varela, archbishop of Madrid
      card. Vallinni episcopal vicar of the Pope to Rome
      card. Scherer archbishop of Sao Paulo (Brazil)
      card. Romeo archbishop of Palermo ( Italy )
      card. Erdo, archbishop of Budapest (Hungary)
      card. Polycarp President of the Episcopal Conference of Portugal
      card. Rodríguez archbishop of Santo Domingo ( Dominican Republic)
      card. Anthony Okogie Archbishop of Lagos ( Nigeria)
      card. George Pell Archbishop of Sydney
      Msgr Andre Leonard . Archbishop of Brussels ( cardinal at the next consistory )
      Msgr. Vincent Nichols Archbishop of Westminster ( Cardinal at the next consistory )
      Msgr. Guatiero Bassetti archbishop of Perugia ( Italy) ( cardinal at the next consistory )

      They have become most powerful of Opus Dei or Knights Columbus

    5. Jan 8 11:54pm posted "neo are protected in the Vatican , in the center in Galilee regularly host house important bishops and cardinals , some examples ..."

      ... so, if I went to or visited that neo center or shrine and even if I signed a guest book or dined with NCW members, does that make me a NCW member, advocate or even a protector/defender or guardian of NCW? I think not.

    6. Well then 11:54, protected in the center of Galilee, then by all means use your money to donated to the cause in the Holy Land. Give it to the Knights of the holy sepulchre Order here on island so that they can send it in as a donation. Or yet, best send it directly to the grand Master saying donations from the NCW on Guam. Put you money to good use. No Christians in the holy land, means land is no longer a part of our Christianity. Be charitable and donate what you have. Remember money is evil so give it away where it is most needed THE HOLY LAND

  4. 1. It seems to me that the Archbishop has the burden of proving that a layman being lent the keys now and then to do this or that errand is legally tantamount to "de facto" employment. I wonder if this terminology and this concept will hold up under legal and/or canonical evaluation.

    2. The Archbishop also has the burden of proving that a lay person who is active, even daily, in being physically present at a parish, participating in the liturgical and social life of the parish (along with hundreds of others, some of whom may ALSO have a criminal record, even perhaps of rape or some other violent crime), folding chairs, sweeping floors, picking up trash along with other parishioners, is legally/canonically tantamount to "de facto employment." That would mean A LOT of us lay people are de facto employees of our parishes! Wow! Thanks, Archbishop, I never knew that!