Tuesday, March 25, 2014

A. REYES ASKS: WHY IS THAT ARCHBISHOP ANTHONY?

A Reyes - AgatMarch 25, 2014 at 9:19 AM

I am an Agat parishioner and live near the chapel. When that chapel was being built we were told that we could only have mass there one Sunday per month. They wanted us join the rest of the parish the rest of the time. Now the NCW uses it every week for their masses. Can we also use it every week for Sunday masses? I would love to if possible.

Then I see in the U Matuna that the Boys Chapel is also being restricted for use. No Sunday masses, no baptisms, no weddings. I am a donor to that chapel and no one mentioned when they were asking for funds about any restrictions. If it is a Catholic chapel why can't it be used as such?

It seems very unfair that the NCW can celebrate anywhere they want every Saturday, including houses, hotels and gymnasiums, but official Catholic chapels cannot be used for these same purposes.

Why is that Archbishop Anthony?



How the chapel looks when "regular" Catholics use it.


How the chapel looks when Neo-Catholics use it.


MY NOTES: I too live near the Santa Ana Chapel. My next door neighbor's family is the family which both originally donated the land and, about 10 years ago, began raising the money to rebuild the chapel after the original had been destroyed. 

At the time the fund raising efforts began, the construction costs were estimated to be about $30,000. After the group raised about $15,000 of it, they went to the Archbishop to request assistance to fund the balance. The Archbishop told them that they would have to raise the full amount on their own. So they did.

Their efforts were ceaseless. Every Sunday they were at the parish Masses with different fund raising events: bake sales, pancake breakfasts, etc. They also sold food at the Tuesday Night Market in Agat and hosted a variety of other activities in this effort to rebuild their beloved chapel. 

Meanwhile, though, construction costs went up and when it finally came time to build, the total came to over $50,000. That's quite a sum to be raised through bake sales and other small fund raisers. But raise it they did! And there was quite a celebration when the chapel was completed in 2008.

It is true, that at the time, that in addition to the normal celebrations surrounding the feast of St. Anne for whom the chapel is named, only one Mass per month was allowed to be celebrated there: the Mass for First Saturdays. Regular Sunday Mass and Masses of obligation were not allowed to be celebrated there. Since the Sunday Mass is the center of parish life, I supported the decision not to have Sunday or obligatory Masses there, even though our family could have walked to Mass at the Santa Ana chapel. 

The good people who rebuilt the Santa Ana Chapel understood and complied without complaint. However, they now see the chapel that they built - with years of bake sales - used 3-4 times per week by neo groups, including a weekly Sunday liturgy (the neo's Saturday night "eucharist"), something the builders of the chapel were denied.

A. Reyes, above, makes an important point. Where is the "decree" allowing "Sunday and obligatory Masses" (the "eucharists" celebrated by the Neos) in all these other places: hotels, gyms, parish halls, private homes, classrooms, etc.? If a consecrated Catholic Chapel cannot be used for Sunday Mass, then how come a parish hall? If a consecrated Catholic Chapel cannot be used for Baptisms, then how come the Bishop Baumgartner School gymnasium (where the Neos held/hold their Easter Vigil and perform baptisms)? And by the way, where are those baptisms recorded? Or are they?

We indeed, have two churches on Guam, if not doctrinally differentiated - as we are finding out more and more - then certainly differentiated by administration and favors. And we are being asked to pay for all this. 

Meanwhile, WHERE IS THAT REPORT?




44 comments:

  1. Mr. Reyes,
    This Archbishop will not answer you through this blog. You and / or you neighbor and their families will need to go directly to the Archbishop for these answers. But 1st has anyone brought this to the attention of Fr. Jose? If he allows weekly NCW celebrations, then why can't he allow weekly Sunday Celebrations. Go and present these questions as a group. There isn't supposed to be anything special about the NCW and their celebrations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Archbishop will not answer even if you go directly to him. Every direct inquiry from myself to the Archbishop posted on this blog was also, and usually first, a personal letter to the Archbishop. But that's not really the point. Mr. Reyes is not asking for himself. It is not just Mr. Reyes, or his family who is affected by the Archbishop's favoritism. It is the entire Catholic community of Guam.

      Thus, this isn't just about Fr. Jose or allowing a weekly Sunday Mass at Santa Ana chapel. This is about why the Archbishop continues to persecute and hinder the part of the church on Guam that is not Neo. Of course we know why. And we also know that he will continue. Thus in his mind he does not owe us an answer. He expects us to shut up and obey. And he expects this because it has always worked for him.

      Whether it will continue to work or not depends much on this blog, which is why he went to Rome to silence me. If Rome (the Grand Master of the Knights of the Holy Sepulcher) had found his claims credible, I would have been banished from the Order. I was not. The Archbishop was heard to say that he has been exonerated by Rome's lack of action. I can say the same.

      Delete
    2. I will answer the question for you. Our little Chapel of San Ramon in Canada, Barrigada still has Sunday Masses.

      According to Edward Garcia who works at the main Church and part of the NCW, the celebration of the word is the most important that is why we were denied to use the Chapel to pray the rosary for our deceased.

      When you are in need of a priest and your pastor is of the NCW, then you are out of luck if you need him and there is a celebration of the NCW. They will tell you that the Celebration of the Word is more important.

      Delete
    3. Dear Tim,
      Please, I meant no disrespect to you on my earlier post. I was merely suggesting. I am a part of the entire Catholic community who feels left out because of the favoritism this Archbishop demonstrates action after action. I say "this" Archbishop because I no longer respect him as being The Archbishop of the Diocese that I am in.

      I just feel that more of us anonymous people need to get up and stand in front of this Archbishop and our Priests demanding answers, perhaps even protesting to get his darn attention. We are deserving of some answers.

      Tim, I appreciate everything you do here on JungleWatch and especially for what you have done and what you continue to do for the True Catholic Church. Your work is truly honorable.

      Delete
    4. Yes. I understood your intent and I wasn't answering you directly, just extending the point you were trying to make that even if the archbishop will not answer we should never tire of asking.

      Delete
    5. Janet B - MangilaoMarch 25, 2014 at 4:59 PM

      This whole issue of the Decree banning the Boys' Chapel is very disturbing. The three stooges on the Hill have struck again! Is it not a consecrated space allowed by the real Church for the valid celebration of the sacraments? Being as though the Decree is now THE common way to get the "Official" word of the Chancery dunces out to the faithful, might I suggest they add another decree to clarify the one concerning the Boys' Chapel. It should read something close to the following:

      "Be it decreed by King Tony and Adrian, Duke of Bewilderment, that all the faithful shall attend mass and eucharist only in consecrated spaces allowed by Mother Church. The use of all chapels, oratories, gymnasiums, hotels, houses, and other paces are no longer suitable for the divine worship. Baptisms and Confirmations on the Easter Vigil can no longer be performed in hotels, locker rooms, gymnasiums, or other profane/secular spaces normally used by Spanish singing groups. This decree is issued in order that all the faithful will abide by the same set of rules, without preference to certain groups, cults, charisms, or bishops."

      Wouldn't it be amazing if the Neo-cuckoos actually had to follow all the same rules that Tony imposes on the rest of us? Not allowing Sunday masses in the Boys' Chapel makes no sense no matter how you look at it, but I guess doing so in a house is ok as long as you are a cult member. Not being allowed to baptize in the Boys' Chapel makes no sense, but the Neo hold off baptism for far too long so they can have their babies baptised in the parallel church of St Hyatt of Tumon.

      Tony and Adrian are cuckoo, so why should we expect a decree that actually made sense? They are embedded in their parallel church so far they barely see the real Church, even when they are at a real mass on Sunday in a real church.

      This is who our Church is being run by, and over-run by. Either fight (hold back your money) or get used to the Way things are going to be in the future.

      Delete
  2. I hope Mr. A Reyes is an active parishioner in that parish. Last I heard the 4pm Mass is cancelled. Talk to ur NEW Pastor Mr. A Reyes!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fail to see how knowing the Mass schedule at Santa Ana chapel is a litmus test for being or not being an active parishioner of Mt. Carmel, particularly if one never intends to go to Mass there.

      Delete
  3. I agree that we should have at least one Sunday Mass every week at the Santa Ana chapel for those who live nearby. I mean, it only makes sense if our Neo brothers and sisters gather there for their celebrations twice a week. Other Catholics should be given that same opportunity since it was built at the request of the people of Agat. If the San Ramon chapel in Barrigada can do, so can Santa Ana. However, there is a problem. Barrigada had many priests in residence there, which made things easier. In Agat, however, we have only one priest. SO things might be more difficult for him if we were to have a Sunday Mass there every week. It would be interesting if you attended the 7am Mass on the First Saturday at the chapel to get the opinions of those parishioners who make use of the opportunity to attend Mass there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am NOT A Neo but an active member of the parish of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. THIS MAKES ME LAUGH.

    You guys should come down and see for yourself all the effort and money is going to. Our church looks beautiful. No need for the reports. If so, the members of the Parish Council should have it or just see the inside and outside of the church yourself. The People of Hagat really love their church and are doing their best to repair it. We also Thank Father Jason Granado for pushing us to this. And we pray that we will continue to reach our goal for the church.

    MY POINT: The People of Hagat are handling this renovation. Si Yu'os Ma'ase!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm curious as to why you feel you need to remain anonymous.

      Delete
  5. Parishioners of the 7:00 a.m. Mass are all from the Main Church. So it really doesn't matter if we have mass there or not. The 4 p.m. Mass attendance are less than 20 people, most of who aren't from the Santa Ana Area. The purpose for that Chapel was basically for those who stay down in that area to attend mass. BUT it seems not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Aguon from Chalan PagoMarch 25, 2014 at 6:27 PM

    Wow is all I can say. This is more proof that what the Neo wants, the Neo gets. The Yigo chapel(Bernadita) has no restrictions and is run by the Neo and used by the Neo quite often. Of course they do not pay for its use. That is the responsibility of the non Neo parishoners. The chapel in Barrigada is also run by the Neo and has no restrictions. There is also Saint Andrew in Dededo(the Korean church). It is a chapel in status and has no restrictions at all. I understand that Deacon Kim was instrumental in getting this done. I guess being the head finance guy at the Chancery has its benefits and privileges. Poor FD. It is not run by the Neo, the chapel was not built in the likeness of Kiko, and its located in the Mangilao parish, a Capuchin domain. Three strikes and you are out!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Agat needs a lot of help too! Mr. Man with the Hat on the Hill! Send some of ur Boy Boys down here! The People of Guam needs more Good and Holy Priest!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Boys" "Agat" "Man with the Hat on the Hill". Be careful. Those words have other meanings.

      Delete
    2. Exactly anon 1123. When we read this we knew boys, agat, the one one on the hill. We know the history. May be its to,e to re open history.

      Delete
    3. Boys, agat, man on the hill. Not good words to use they don't mix well.

      Delete
    4. Boys, Agat, Man with Hat on the Hill....
      CRYPTIC, VERY.

      Delete
  8. By my understanding , chapels are used for divine worship for faithful Catholics . Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament or visit Jesus and God to pray in private. I do understand fellow friars and other catholic organizations want to pray in private. I do not and mean no offense itend to question the authority of others fellow Priests / Nuns and his excellency Archbishop Apuron . . Why restrict Sunday masses , people or parishoners should be welcomed to celebrate the mass in a chapel. Although sacraments are not to be celebrated in a Chapel but an official church. It is an obligation , wait not an obligation but a established order by God . True it is not a consecrated spacebut with heavy restrictions on the sacraments but masses they should be celebrated , at least on Sundays. People should be given the opportunity to attend mass at all costs even though they cannot reach their main parish. I do not question the authority of others and Archbishop Apuron . Why restrict the celebration of a mass? Define chapel " it is used for small services " . Therefore they can dictate the restrctions on sacraments but regular masses. Define chapel " a place for worship" " a place of worship in an insitution " Why allow celebrations out side of consecrated place in ....hotels....gymnasium ? Why? Impose restrictions on chapels why ? Should a chapel be used for small service , or private prayer worship. Im not trying to offend anyone , I am a strong catholic with much concerns of our community .

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but could someone tell me how's Father Paul doing and his case with Apuron?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The appeal has been filed in the canonical case. The civil case is still under construction.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous (March 26, 2014): As far as how Fr. Paul is doing — apart from this case with the Archbishop — I've had the blessing of attending several of his Lenten Masses at SASVCC. As in his days at Sta. Barbara Parish, he chants the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei and the students of SACS are learning the chants,

      Friends have told me that they've had the pleasant surprise of having Fr. Paul celebrate Masses in their parishes, too. We can truly see that, as St. Paul wrote "to them that love God all things work together unto good …" While Fr. Paul waits for word about his canonical case, he is able to minister to Catholics in other parishes and be a blessing to them!

      Like someone else who posted a comment on this blog, my requests to Blessed Diego include that: (1) Fr. Paul will be fully restored to his ministry and return to his position as Pastor of Sta. Barbara and (2) Archbishop Apuron will repent, stop walking in the NCW, stop demonstrating favoritism toward the NCW and return to his position as spiritual leader of ALL the Catholics in the Archdiocese.

      Delete
    3. Thank You! Mr. Rohr, how soon are we going to see actions done? This is taking way too long and I believe this is giving the Archbishop time to "Train" before he gets into the "war". I hope actions will be made very soon.

      Delete
    4. Actually, nothing will be done until real people begin to confront the Archbishop personally, if only by letter. But it needs to start.

      Delete
    5. Nothing has happened for six months. Nothing will happen. The people of Guam have to implement action directly. When you stop the money you will see changes. Rome is not concerned about Guam now, Infact they would be happy if a storm came and swept us all away. End of problem.

      Delete
    6. Have phoned the archbishop in the office several times. Lisa does not put us through. I did call his private line and got the archbishop by mistake he thought someone else calling. He blasted for calling the private lame demanding how I got it. He does not want phone calls.

      Delete
  10. Why did Archbishop wear Rose vestments last Sunday ? This Sunday is laetare Sunday?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tim. On your page are we allowed to comment on fr. Paul's canonical case. Or do you prefer not to emcourage this.
    Just want to respect the page and you. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for asking. Feel free to comment.

      Delete
  12. So here's another FYI for those who want to confront me personally. You don't get to do that unless you have the decency to use your real name and be willing to meet with me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will meet you for lunch in kings anytime to discuss the community with you. Just tell me when. Ron cathedral community.

      Delete
    2. Great send me your phone and email at timrohr.guam@gmail.com

      Delete
    3. and your full name as well

      Delete
  13. All the important whys are not going to be answered, why, because the Archbishop is so convinced the KIko Arguello is " the hand that rocks the cradle who will rule the world!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is this the reason why someone did mentioned that the ncw is a gift of the Holy Spirit? I have been wondering why an artist and a displaced nun are held in such a high esteem by the followers, and now we have Eight Gifts of the Holy Spirit? This I feel as nothing but h.. w... Jes of Chalan Pago

      Delete
  14. It might just be quite interesting, that since they make their own bread for communion and this is a loaf I am presuming, then when the priest passes out pieces of the consecrated bread, and crumbs fall to the floor, what happens to the consecrated crumbs?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes we make the bread for our liturgy. Nothing wrong with that. If crumbs fall they are cleaned up . The bread we make is a symbol reminder of what Jesus did at last supper. We simply re in act what he did.

      Delete
    2. I seriously doubt the above comment was made by a neo. Don't bother responding to it. I think I know who the impostor is. It's time to cut the crap.

      Delete
    3. @3:09. Kiko does not teach that the bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ, but that he appears "in them". Luther calls it the "sacramental union". Christ himself remains separate from the substance of the bread and wine, thus crumbs or spills don't matter. More on this in an upcoming documentary.

      Delete
    4. Oh dear! I remember an action of a visiting priest. When the sacred host fell on the floor while distributing communion, he stopped, signaled the altar server to bring him some water and the corporal. He picked up the host, aye it, then took the corporal dipped it in water and knelt on floor and wipe the spot where the sacred host fell. He then washed his hands once more and proceeded to give out communion.

      Delete
    5. Correct Tim. The comment yesterday about the crumbs was correct. Attended a NCW mass just to observe am not a member . Noticed the crumbs and questioned it. The members were not concerned as you correctly state, they believe Christ is in the bread but remains separate. It may be that some readers on the page need help understanding what is being said. What the NCW is teaching is not catholic at all, but few will see it. Difficult to see why the archbishop allows it to be taught.

      Delete
    6. Yipes! I certainly pray that our none of our Catholic brothers and sisters are taught this heresy! If so, know and understand that the Real Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist is a very clear teaching of the Catholic Church since ever since!
      For almost 1200 years, the Church liturgies reflected what Jesus Christ revealed to the Jewish people (John 6) and instructed at the Last Supper. The Council of Trent answered these heresies that denied the Real Presence in the "Decree Concerning The Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist."
      One evening, I had the opportunity to attend one of Tim's discussions at the Cathedral Gift Shop. It was not a lecture, it was not a fire and brimstone speech, nor was it a "beetch" session. We simply opened the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) and read it.
      I know, genius!
      (to be continued . . .)

      Delete
    7. (Cont . . .)

      When referencing and cross referencing the documents provided to us by the Church, there can be created NO new revelation!
      The Real Presence of our Lord is different from his spiritual presence. Jesus is "body, blood, soul and divinity" in the consecrated host. This is the source and summit of our Faith! This is why we have clear universal liturgies. This is why we have a GIRM. This is why the Magistarium gives us documents like "Redemptionis Sacramentum." These documents are not restrictive for restrictions sake, rather they are wholly instructive in order for us not to be tempted to stray from the Truth or fabricate illicit worship.
      There can be no new interpretations or revelations to what has been taught by Jesus Christ (CCC 67, 68). He was very clear in saying that His Presence is real. No matter how charismatic or emotion inducing the leader is, if they are teaching that which is contrary to Jesus' word, it will always remain false. And if false teaching is what is being fed, how can that be fruitful?
      Again, the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist is the source and summit of the Catholic Church. Dismiss this Truth, and you separate yourself from the Church created by Christ.

      Delete
  15. In a recent post Tim stated that the NCW's view regarding the eucharist is similar to that of the Lutherans. Many years ago I visited a Lutheran Church and was concerned when a piece of the consecrated bread fell on the floor and was left there. When I picked it up and gave it to the pastor's wife after the service, she said there was no problem, that Christ was no longer in it.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch