Wednesday, March 12, 2014


As you know, I have invited "Diana" to a personal chat (here and here) so that we might both fulfill Christ's command found in Matthew 18:15-16, which tells us how to deal with problems between people within the church. The command does not depend on the prospects of conciliation or apologies. The command is the command, and because someone in a comment recommended that we actually do this, I proposed that we should. However, Diana's answer is NO. We pick up the conversation here on her blog with Zoltan's comment referencing my invitation to Diana and disparagingly referencing me as "Timmy". 

  1. Hi Diana, I guess I don't need to say anything. I completely trust your judgment. I still write down my opinion. This offer from the Jungle is as fake as the fake is. First of all, there is no offer of apology after his avalanche of scoffing and insults. No apology to you, not to anyone else. If Timmy thinks seriously that you represent more than yourself, then he also has to apologize for everyone he has hurt. This is that simple, a basic condition for any further contact. Otherwise there is absolutely nothing, zero, zilch to talk about with him, in my opinion.


    1. Sounds like your'e holding a grudge.
    2. Dear Zoltan,
      Walking in the Way is not always easy. As one anonymous poster pointed out, we need to be humble. I am not anyone's spokesperson.
    3. Then you need speak for no one other than yourself. No. I am not apologizing. I am asking you to confront me as a Christian. I am asking because you have much to say about me here. I will listen as promised.
    4. Dear Tim,
      People have much to say about you because you made it that way. You made yourself known so many can say much about you. You are not interested in knowing anything about the Neocatechumenal Way. You only want to know my identity.

      Furthermore, my posts are not about you. I never said your name in any of my posts. I always say "Those who oppose the Way" because it isn't only you who oppose the Way. However, people say your name in comments to my post.
    5. Diana, I believe that if you are a strong advocate and believe in whatever path you are on, then there should be no fear in meeting with Tim Rohr. If not, then you do not have the faith or strength to face him head on. Think about it!
    6. Dear Anonymous,
      The strength of my faith is not measured in whether I meet Tim Rohr or not.
    7. I have no idea why your identity needs to be a mystery in the first place. I have no clue why Christians do not have enough strength of their convictions to put their name on them. And no, I have no desire to know who you really are. I only have the desire to fulfill the commandment of Christ to confront our brothers as he prescribes. It may go nowhere, but at least we will have fulfilled the command. And as the scripture says, once you fulfill that prescription, you can shake the dust from your feet and move on. However, if you will not meet me, please send someone who will.
    8. And so if it isn't about me and about many who oppose the Way, then have you attempted to personally engage any of them as Christ instructs?
    9. It's because "Diana" may be a conglomerate of persons. Also, in-line with the distortions and manipulations of official documents, "Diana" has to distort and manipulate who "she" is. Meeting with Tim will reveal the deception.
      As long as "Diana" is not identified, anything written on this blog will never be verifiable as well as nobody can be held accountable for the errors.
      It is in "Diana's" interest to never reveal who they are and to never meet with anyone. 
    10. As I was taught since I was a kid, there is no need to "show face" or be known just because you strongly defend something. What the point of knowing ones identity? I mean does it matter?
    11. Dear Tim,
      There are always two sides to every story. You provide one side, and I provide the other side. The purpose of your blogiste is to tell people about the Neocatechumenal Way. My blogsite serves the same purpose. The only difference is that you are voicing your opinion as one who has never participated in the Neocatechumenal Way. I am the one walking in the Way for 8 years. Also, you didn't sin against me. I think it's the Archbishop you offended the most especially with your call to gather people against him.

      And to Anonymous at 9:28 a.m., I am not a conglomerate of many persons. I am one person, and anyone can see that from my writing. I provide sources to back up what I say. For example, the letter of the priest who has a PH.D is on the Internet, and I provided the weblink for you and everyone else to read. All you need to do is show me how I managed to manipulate his letter.

      As an example, Tim Rohr interpreted Kiko's letter to the Pope as "disobedience".....I will not obey. Under this thread which I posted, I showed that there is a difference between disobedience and disagreements, and how Kiko's letter was one of disagreement rather than disobedience. Even Tim Rohr agrees that it's okay to disagree with the Pope as he stated in one of his posts.
  2. Well if anyone want's to Dialogue, the seminary it's down there in Yona. The damage is done, people were hurt in community and outside the NCW. I fully respect Tim but did not expect this from him. He inspired me to defend the CATHOLIC Church from the past. After all, the main goal for all of us being in the womb of the Catholic Church is the Kingdom of Heaven. How to gain this? Is love. Diana keep the articles pumping.
  3. So then, Diana, your answer is No? Please confirm.


    1. That is correct. My answer is no.
    2. Diana, you are correct in acknowledging that the strength of one’s faith cannot be measured by such actions or choices as agreeing to meet OR face off with anyone as the situation is with Tim’s offer; in fact there is only One who can measure and judge the depth or superficiality of our Faith – no one else but God, our Creator. That said, it is also an innate human quality or human nature to want to share with excitement and joy, one’s discovery of authentic faith and Truth with everyone -- and not from the “closet.”

      Having discovered and thus possessing that which is The Authentic Truth one would not be able to contain the yearning not only to Share that Truth, but most especially to pass on and reveal such Truth, In Person! So why the hesitancy with taking on the opportunity to share the Neocatechuminal Way and Truth you walk with Tim?? Isn’t that a way of evangelizing?
    3. Dear Anonymous,
      Tim Rohr does not need to be evangelized because he is a Catholic like me., I also don't think Tim is interested in knowing the truth about the Neocatechumenal Way.
    4. I believe the Archbishop is the root to this. Archbishop has offended Tim and others and so they attack the NCW because he has close ties with them. What if the Archbishop was never involved with the NCW but still allowed in Guam?
    5. Dear Anonymous,

      I had the same suspicions in the beginning. I suspect that there is a history between the Archbishop and Tim. I don't know what that history is or what the Archbishop did to Tim and vice versa. Whatever it is, I hope that the wounds between them can heal. There are people in the Way who are good people, and many of them may not even know Tim Rohr or even the Archbishop at the personal level.

      How is the NCW even involved in the problem.....unless one feels that the Archbishop pays more attention to the NCW. If that is the case, then the problem is not the NCW. Perhaps, one simply needs to bring to the attention of the Archbishop that he appears to favor the NCW over anything else. Sometimes, people don't realize what they are doing unless one brings it to their attention. 

Now, in answer to this last comment, by Diana herself, I posted the following. I don't know if she will approve for posting, so I am copying it here:

Yes, there is a history between the Archbishop and myself. I have gone to battle for him when no one else would. Back when no one would come forward to stand up against BJ Cruz and his same-sex bill, it was me the Archbishop turned to. I asked him if he could find someone else. I didn't feel equipped. I asked him if there was anyone in the Neocatechumenal Way, lawyers who knew much more than me who would stand up to BJ Cruz, an attorney, a senator, and a former Supreme Court Chief Justice. The Archbishop said, no. There was no one. 

It took me 9 months of fighting against this bill on the radio, on TV, in the newspaper, 9 months of my life when I was struggling financially due to enormous medical bills related to the birth of one of my children, 9 months of being called a bigot and a homophobe and mocked. 

And it was I who put together a symposium to go the churches and speak about this bill and what its effects would be. It was I who asked the Archbishop to ask Edward Garcia and Ric Eusebio to join me in this crusade. It was I who stood side by side with them night after night in parish after parish talking and urging people to oppose this bill. 

And then when BJ went after the Archbishop personally with a bill that would have put him behind bars for not reporting known sex abuse cases (AND THERE WERE KNOWN SEX ABUSE CASES), it was I who went to bat for him, it was I who fought BJ tooth and nail in the media, it was I who the Archbishop's legal counsel called when they needed somebody to go after SNAP. Ask him.

It was I who fought to limit BJ Cruz's "window legislation" so that the archdiocese couldn't be sued as other dioceses in the states have been sued. It was my face which was the hated face of the Catholic Church in the media. It was I who was called the "bishop's boy", the bishop's lackey", the "bishop's dog." Ask him. Ask BJ Cruz. 

It was I who worked to get the first significant legislation introduced to battle the abortionists who had free rein on this island for 30 years. It was I who stood in front of the legislature at public hearings and battled against senators who mocked, ridiculed and even yelled at me. I did it so the Archbishop wouldn't have to and so that I could save him stain of abortion blood on an island that is mostly Catholic and under his control for three decades but kills a child every day, 2/3 of whom are of his own blood. Ask him. 

It is I who go on the radio, on TV, into the newspaper every time our Catholic Faith is mocked or challenged. It is I whose family had to suffer and do without while we sank every available dollar and available minute of our lives in starting a Catholic bookstore so that Catholics could learn about their faith and because no one else would do it. It was I who got my children up at 4am on Sunday mornings so we could load up our car with tables and books so that we could be at the 6am Mass somewhere and sell books after Masses standing in the rain and the sun when other families were enjoying brunch, and doing it even though I could have been making much more money doing something else. 

It was I who cleaned up the mess after the Archbishop's meeting with the legislature at which he was accused of wanting to kill homosexuals because of a letter released in his name that he didn't write. It was I who called up Travis Coffman when he was reading the letter in disbelief on the radio that afternoon. It was I who fought to protect the bishop's name, making sure that everyone knew that the archbishop didn't write it even though it was on his letterhead. Ask him. 

It was I who called his attention to the Archdiocese paying for contraceptives and abortifacients because of the Obamacare mandate. It was I who was at the meeting with the Archbishop and his advisors: Deacon Kim, Msgr. David, Ed Terlaje.  It was I who proposed a solution which has kept this Archdiocese, the only Archdiocese in the whole country, exempt from having to pay for baby killing drugs. Ask them. 

Yes, that is what is between the Archbishop and me. I have gone to bat for him again and again in the dirtiest of battles and when no one else would. I did all these things because I love my Catholic Faith and because the Church is my Mother, and you don't mess with my Mother. I did it too because the Archbishop is the embodiment of the Catholic Church, and protecting him was protecting my Church. But the Archbishop has chosen to attack a portion of that Catholic Church, he has chosen to side against the portion that is not Neo, he has chosen to destroy priests and deacons who stand in his way, and I will fight him as viciously as I protected him. 

But if you don't want to meet with me if only to fulfill the commandment of the Lord so that you can rightfully shake the dust from your feet, then, well, at least you know the rest of the story. 

Recommendations by JungleWatch