Tuesday, May 6, 2014


It is time now to review the offense for which Father Paul is allegedly guilty. The name of the subject person, even though it is already known, is being withheld out of consideration for the the man's wife and his two young daughters who have nothing to do with this. 

Here are the Archbishop's exact words from the July 16, 2013 letter demanding his resignation:
You have allowed a registered sex offender, (name withheld), to return to work at the parish, even after you were warned by the Vicar General and the Attorney for the Archdiocese to release him. You disobeyed the order given by the Vicar General. By this action, you have in effect caused grave harm to the parish by allowing such an individual with a publicly known sex-offense record to work in the Church thus exposing him to your parishioners, especially the youth. By allowing him to work in the parish, you have exposed the children of the nearby school to a probable threat.
Let's stop here and discuss. Let's say, for the sake of the discussion, that everything the Archbishop accuses Fr. Paul of is true and that everything he says about the man is true. It's not, but we'll get to that. Now let's say the man, who committed his crime 33 years ago and was released from prison after a lengthy term, instead of going to Santa Barbara showed up at a catechesis for the Neocatechumenal Way. And let's say that the catechist or the responsible or whoever was in charge of that particular catechesis learned of the man's record and went to the Archbishop for counsel on how to handle the desire of a registered sex-offender to enter a community. 

How do you think the Archbishop would have responded? Would he have said what he said here to Fr. Paul? Note that the "great harm" noted by the Archbishop is not that the man worked in the parish but that he was "exposed to parishioners, especially the youth." Would he not be "exposed" to Neocatechumenal community members? Are there no "youth" in the Neocatechumenal Way? What do you do with a registered sex-offender who wants to join a Neocatechumenal community?

If the man was a danger simply by being around the parish, how much more dangerous would he be in a community where the exposure would be much more frequent and close? There is only one answer based on the Archbishop's own words: OUT! But then how does that comport with Kiko's words: 
"...we have always shown to the many brothers who have emerged from hell, full of wounds and of self-loathing, that in the Holy Eucharist the Lord makes present his love, dying and rising for them; and not only that, but prepares a table, an eschatological banquet, which makes Heaven present and where He himself, full of love, has them sit down and comes to serve them." - Letter from Kiko Arguello to Pope Benedict XVI, Jan. 17, 2006.
Let's go further. What if this man had shown up on your own door step, Archbishop? What if this man had asked to join your community? What if this man had asked for your spiritual guidance and assistance in healing the wounds of his own self-loathing? Is he not one of "the many brothers who have emerged from hell?" Would you not "prepare a table" for him? An eschatological banquet...full of love, and have him sit down with you?

Fr. Paul did exactly what you say you profess to do as one who is walking. Yet he is brutalized for his compassion and the ex-prisoner beaten and humiliated by your condemnation.  Do you see the problem?

We do.

Go here for Part VI


  1. This is why the Fr. Paul case is a crucial turning point for how the Catholic Church in Guam is governed. Do we continue to endure the brutal and terrorizing governance and tenure of archbishop Apuron which started over 25 years ago? Perhaps we will if Rome does not act, and if Rome does not act, we will endure but not without a fight.

  2. I remember the words of a kind, holy priest: "The beauty of being a Catholic is that everyone has a seat at the table of forgiveness"

    Such a beautiful sentiment! How unfortunate for this parishioner to be branded and banished as though no sinners are allowed ever into the church. This man was practically tossed into the gutter, but that is not what Jesus Christ preached.

    This is speculation on my part, so it may not be fit for posting, but based on the evidence provided and the timeline, the Arch was finding any excuse to remove Fr. Paul. I question why he just did not simply transfer him with an official aviso? Why drag Fr. Paul through this mud? I believe in my heart it was to punish him. The higher ups above the Arch probably ordered it so Fr. Paul would be made as an example to those pastors that "oppose" the way. It breaks my heart just thinking about it, but what other explanation can there be?

    Ria Camacho

    1. I believe, that in cases like this, that no one should have the power, to expel anyone from priesthood, What ever happened to the saying, which I don't know where it came from. that a pries is always a priest. How about the priests who did sex offense to alter boys. And this is not even Fr. Paul's, crime and he is being punished as though he's the one who committed the crime. Above all, I think, in a case like this, only the Pope should have the power to dismiss Fr. Paul from priesthood. Because I don't think Jesus would do the same thing to Fr. Paul If He were the one to take actions on it. Just saying according to my Catholicism beliefs...

    2. To be clear Fr. Paul was not removed from the priesthood, but from his post as pastor. But in effect his priesthood was extremely limited by his being denied, initially, to be able to say Mass, and ultimately by his being blackballed so that probably no other diocese will take him. But you are right about Jesus.

    3. The real issue is how to tackle sexual abuse in the church. If we announce zero tolerance, then we need to extend the policies accordingly. Sexual predators should not be allowed to come anywhere near to a parish.
      But who is a sexual predator? That person who had been convicted or the other one who has sexual activity outside marriage? Obviously not the same kind of category! People usually don't like to admit this kind of activity, perhaps at confession only.
      So what is the verdict? Keep track of those who pose danger to our kids.especially if they have ever been convicted. Zero tolerance is not coming by itself, you have to do it. The U.S. registry may also be contacted, they can provide a list of convicted felons.
      Jesus did not say the woman that "Go and please, sin more." But he said the opposite: "Go and sin NO more." What a difference!

    4. We need to clarify: a registered sex-offender is not necessarily a sexual predator. And to be ultra-clear the man's offense was not with a child. However, the real issues is how this man was used to serve other purposes.

  3. Where is the forgiveness? Where is the 'Prodigal Son' parable put into action by the HEAD of the Catholic Faith on this Island? Si San Dimas ma'asei' ge uttimu ora nu todu y esao nia. Forgive; walk in the foot steps of Christ. Be a good example. Forgiving, graceful, & simple. Mellow out.

  4. I notice at mass now, the neo priest is him homilies are focused on the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist more than ever before. What a conicidence! Why is that?

    1. That's certainly good news! Since actions truly speak louder than words preachings therefore, need to be practiced if we are to believe it is genuine -- of the neo regard for The Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Consecrated Host!

      The Roman Catholic Church’s adherence to the Rubrics reflect our belief and acceptance of the Mass as a remembrance and celebration of Christ’s sacrificial death on the Cross and His victory over death.

      The Liturgical norms we follow also reflect the depth of our holy reverence, respect for and our worship of HIM, WHO IS THE ONE TRUE GOD! These prescribed postures and gestures PHYSICALLY demonstrate our humble adoration and homage of OUR LORD AND OUR GOD’S Holiness, Divinity, and HIS Supremacy over us, HIS lowly creation!

      Because at the mention of Jesus’ Name alone, (Holy Scripture says) “every knee shall bend and every head shall bow down” thus, Jesus Christ’s REAL PRESENCE in the Consecrated Host -- upon being consecrated, distributed and received -- also demand our humble PHYSICAL acknowledgment of The Honor and Homage due HIM, WHO IS OUR LORD! AND OUR GOD!

    2. Glad to be Back to Holy Mother ChurchMay 9, 2014 at 11:00 AM

      Tim - your observation in this post is very astute. There definitely appears to be a dangerous double standard.
      I am well aware of a very active community member for many years, who many would view as a threat. The person is retired military, with psychological problems suffered from the horrors of war. At one moment this person can be very polite, consoling, and spiritual. But at any given moment is subject to extreme behavior. So much so that the court issued a restraining order to protect the spouse and children.
      Yet this person is allowed to walk in a community with a Chancery official, does many tasks for the Archdiocese regarding the NCW and other events, and is in constant contact with church members.
      Thank God there has been no grave incident (that I am aware of) regarding this person, but it seems to a reasonable man that if the person in Santa Barbara posed a threat to the parishioners, then this person, because of past crimes convicted of, also poses an extreme threat to parishioners, especially community members.
      I do not know why the Archbishop has never spoken to the high ranking Chancery official about this apparent threat to community members, but it certainly seems like a valid example of a double standard on how the Santa Barbara parishioner was treated compared to the NCW community member.
      While I know the Archbishop and the high ranking Chancery official will never comment on this, it would certainly be good to hear their perspective on this apparent contradiction in actions.
      In the meantime, we should pray for the safety of all the NCW members that their fellow member does not strike out against them, or anyone else.

    3. Thank you. I know the person personally and we have always been friendly. However, it wasn't until recently that I became aware of who he was on this blog. I really do wish that those who differ with me would approach me personally. The person in question knows me and knows I'm approachable. On the blog when people are firing at you from behind pseudonyms it can get pretty fiery.