Wednesday, May 28, 2014


In the Appeal of Fr. Paul's removal which was sent to Rome, Fr. Paul's attorney, Fr. Adolpho Dacanay, S.J., concludes his investigation of the case with the following remarks (emphases mine):
3.5 This is a canonical procedure that has gone awry. In the process, canonical procedures were mangled, provisions of the Code were ignored, the attempt to correct the bungled process feeble, and in the meantime the rights of a pastor violated and his good name ruined. Even the constitution of the advisory body required by C.1742.1 is very suspicious. The concerns raised by the Archbishop could have been accomplished even without the bungled attempt at removal, therefore one really wonders what is the real purpose behind the move. 
After a seven page review of the entire case, Fr. Dacanay poses the same question most of the Archdiocese of Agana has been asking even though almost everyone knows the answer. Everyone knows the answer because everyone knows the Archbishop's intention: to mow down any priest or deacon who stands in the way of The Way, and to intimidate into submission everyone else.

Of course, Fr. Dacanay is not really asking. He is tying the disregard for canonical procedure, something he clearly demonstrates in the seven-page appeal, to an ulterior motive, and formally placing it before the Vatican congregation who will hear the case. This is serious stuff: a bishop 1) flagrantly disregards canon law, 2) does so for a purpose other than what he states (lies), and 3) ruins a priest whose welfare he is personally tasked to protect.

This is evil. But I do not ascribe the evil to the Archbishop, at least not yet. It has been very clear to many for over a decade that in Guam "something wicked this way comes". Something or someone evil has got a hold of the Archbishop. Unfortunately, as we have long known, it is not difficult to get a hold of the Archbishop. But that is something he will have to answer for another time. Meanwhile, we need to get to the root of the cancer that is sickening this diocese.

Of course, we don't have to look very far. In fact, as the record increasingly shows, wherever the Neocatechumenal Way has gone, its "Kiko's" (to separate them from the innocent) leave a large swath of destruction and division. It's just that it is more plainly seen here because 1) we have the only bishop in the world who has submitted himself to the Kiko's, and 2) because of our small population and relatively insular life we see things and their effect more immediately.

Fr. Paul knew this was coming. In fact, every non-neo priest KNOWS this is coming! On April 12, 2008, Archbishop Apuron declared war on everyone who stood in his way...The Way. We can trace that declaration of war back to the public protest in front of the Cathedral on the occasion of the celebration of its 50th jubilee.

The Archbishop was publicly humiliated by the protestors who stood across the street from the in the full glare of the Media.* (Also here.) As they processed by, one particular neo-priest began shouting at the protestors. It turned ugly quick. And all this with all the clergy fully vested for the occasion as they processed into the Cathedral for the great celebration. Priests fighting with their own people in front of the Cathedral while the Nuncio and Cardinal looked on and the Archbishop looked away!

* See full text of article below.

The cause of the protest? Again, one has to wonder who is advising the Archbishop or does he just think that because he is the Archbishop everyone is just going to bow down? The cause of the protest was a letter issued by the Archbishop to three pastors ordering them to serve the Neocatechumenal Way or get out of the diocese. (The letters will be posted in an upcoming post. The names of the priests will be redacted.)

The letters were issued on March 28, 2008, just mere weeks before one of the most significant celebrations of the Church on Guam. Beyond wondering about the cruelty shown towards these priests, one wonders how the Archbishop could be such a poor judge of timing. This is what makes us think that either he is taking orders from someone or he is simply imprudent if not cruel all on his own. We prefer the former.

The three pastors had been invited to Guam from the Philippines to serve the people of Guam and had long since done so. They were much loved by the people they served. The Archbishop's demand to serve the Neocatechumenal Way or GET OUT was pure bullying. The people saw it and were horrified by it.

These were Filipino priests. They were not incardinated here, even though two of them had asked to be, and the Archbishop knew he could treat them like H-2 workers and he did. Their parishioners were outraged, and for the first time in the nearly 400 year recorded history of the Catholic Church on Guam, lay people publicly demonstrated against their bishop. And the Archbishop was simply not used to that sort of "photo-op"!

War was declared, and the Redemptoris Mater Seminary, the Archbishop's war machine, was shifted into overdrive. Archbishop Apuron would replace everyone and anyone with his homemade presbyters. It didn't matter that the men would be poorly formed. It didn't matter that even HE KNEW some should not be ordained.  He needed numbers and numbers he got, funneling in as much as 20 times the number of seminarians per population capita than other dioceses, like Boston, which also hosts an RMS. And to top it off, he would make us pay for these presbyters. He would make us pay for the destruction of our priests and our own parishes.

As the parishes began to fall one by one, Fr. Paul knew it was just a matter of time. He knew that what had happened in 2005 and again in 2008, when the Neocatechumenal Way tried to insert itself into Santa Barbara, would be his undoing. He knew who the power brokers were and who pulled the Archbishop's strings. And he knew that by facing down those power brokers they would one day "get him".

Here is Fr. Paul's account of what happened (obtained via email through a mutual contact):
It was around the latter half of 2005, just after I was appointed Parochial Administrator to Santa Barbara parish, when Fr. Pius Sammut, along with other leaders of the Neo-Catechumenal Way, paid me a visit to request to have The Way established at the parish.  
My response to them was that they were more than welcome to come to the parish, but they would be required to celebrate their liturgies in the chapel (Santa Barbara has a chapel underneath the main church). In addition to this, I also told them that their Masses would have to be open to all parishioners. They weren't satisfied with this and so they left. 
I don't quite remember the second time they visited, but at the third meeting, which happened sometime late 2007 or early 2008, I asked the parochial vicars at the time to be with me during the meeting. Those were Fr. Patrick Garcia, Fr. Joel De Los Reyes, Fr. Vito San Andres, and Fr. Eugene Santa Ana.  
Those representing the Neocatechumenal Way were Fr. Pius, I believe Fr. Pablo, definitely a tall woman named Patricia, and I can't quite remember who else was there. They once again asked about starting the Neo at Santa Barbara Church and my response was the same as the first meeting: 1) Yes, but all liturgies had to be celebrated in the Chapel and 2) their Eucharistic celebrations had to be open to all and not be exclusive.  
They weren't satisfied with this and the woman named Patricia literally slammed her fist on the table and stormed out. I am sure the parochial vicars present would testify to this. We were all taken aback by her response and were actually left speechless. We never heard from them again.
And he didn't...until July 16, 2013.


* Permission was given by the Pacific Daily News to copy the full text of the article about the protest with the following credit:

This article was printed in the April 20, 2008, Pacific Daily News

Guam Catholic protesters say Apuron backs movement
Pacific Daily News Hagatna, Guam
Author: Palacios, Eric
Date: Apr 20, 2008
Start Page: A.3
Section: LOCAL
Document Text

Armed with signs and placards, a band of Catholics yesterday protested across from the Dulce Nombre de Maria CathedralBasilica for what they believe is a dividing of Catholicism.

Group members said the protest was not against the Catholic church, but rather the Neocatechumenal Way movement, which they said members of the clergy and Archbishop Anthony Apuron were promoting.

The Neocatechumenal Way "has the ultimate goal of bringing the faithful gradually to the intimacy with Jesus Christ and to make them active members of the Church and credible witnesses of the Good News of the Savior everywhere," according to its Web site.

But Toto resident Lou Bamba said that a person must be invited to attend a Neocatechumenate gathering, whereas the Catholic church freely welcomes anyone.

Bamba said her understanding of the Neocatechumenal convocation is that the group brings non-practicing Catholics back into the church, and converts non-Catholics into believers.

"It's creating a major division in the Catholic church," Bamba said. "The archbishop is personally involved in this Neocatechumenal movement, ... and we feel that it is dividing the three main family institutions that make up the Catholic faith the clergy, parish and biological families."

Go here for Part XIII


  1. Are there any available videos or full text of the article?

    1. The full article is not much longer than the abstract which you can read. Only the PDN covered it that we know of. However, protestors and others may have video and pictures. If so and they are willing to share, we ask that they please link them here in the comments or send me the files or links to

    2. Our protest was held across the street where the old legislature building stands. We were a peaceful group, not shout, not yelling, and no profanity of the sort. We simply held up our signs, banners, etc. prayed the rosary and sang songs to our Blessed Mother in Chamorro.

      All we wanted was to be heard! Our voices fell on deaf ears until now. People thought that the protest came from the Dededo Parish. It began with IHOM Church in Toto when we read the letter given to Father Manny Ombao all because the Bishop wanted him to start a NCW community in our parish, so we protested.

      One cannot force anyone to join any group that they do not believe in.

  2. Glad to be Back to Holy Mother ChurchMay 28, 2014 at 9:59 AM

    Pat Cottman is a very nice woman. However, I have no doubt in what Fr Paul states. It is very shocking to see how otherwise good people can lose all control when it comes to matters of the NCW. I have seen it myself when I was walking, and we have all seen it here in the Jungle Watch blog. Normally good people losing it because people either criticize the Way, or expect them to follow all Church rules and teachings. If only their defense of the Church was as strong as their defense of Kiko!

    This fact has been known by a relative few for quite some time. They are the ones who have escaped the Way, but chose never to talk publicly about it. The type of persecution our Archbishop is capable of is obviously why we have never spoken up about it before. But now that JungleWatch has started to shed some light on the real troubling side of the NCW, more and more people are starting to question whether this movement is a benefit to the Church, or a negative that must be addressed.

    What is so disturbing is that these issues have been out there of about 10 months now and the assigned leader of our Archdiocese has yet to even utter one word about it. I pray our Archbishop will soon address the NCW issue himself before Rome decides it can no longer wait for him to do so.

    1. I would agree with your assessment of Pat Cottman. I have spoken with her many times and it has always been pleasant. However, given my experience here on this blog and in person with some others whenever the Way is in the least bit challenged, I do not discount your further assessment. The radical and immediate flip from kindness into anger is something to behold!

    2. Is there any evidence linking Pattie to the firing of Fr Paul?

  3. Pale' Mike CrisostomoMay 28, 2014 at 10:18 AM

    I support my brother priest, Fr Paul. I stand with him. As a Diocesan priest in the Archdiocese of Agana, I am concerned about the treatment of our Filipino priests, the division in parishes where the NeoCatechumenal Way is present, and especially concerned about our Archbishop who continues to display his liking to the RMS priests over his Diocesan priests. I promise respect and obedience to HIM and HIS successors. I renewed that promise last Chrism Mass. As a priest-son of the Archbishop, I implore him to put an end to all this. I assisted Him by arranging a meeting at the Carmel Monastery with Fr Paul, hoping this would end. However, Fr Paul and the Archbishop both had other expectations. Now, the issue of process and Fr Paul is in the hands of ROME. However, there are other issues need to be addressed----policies of hiring and firing---police and court clearance and sex-offender registry requirements---Creating Safe Environment.---Not to mention, Clergy Personnel Policies, retirement and etc....As president of the Association of the Diocesan Clergy of the Archdiocese of Agana, I implore all of us to pray for our Archbishop and our local Church---that we seek reconciliation and God's Mercy, soon. -----Our Lady, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us!

    1. Thank you, Father. We know how hard you have tried to resolve this privately. And we all know the risk of retribution you now face. We will support you our prayers and sacrifices.

    2. Finally a true and honest voice! Pale' Mike, thank you, thank you, thank you!

      Signed: Catechism 000

    3. Dear Fr Mike, I assume nobody truly questioned that Guam Catholics want peace. So our goal is common. We pray for peace and unity. However, we have issues of incitement right here on this blog.

      While it is easy to explain unjustified presuppositions of authors by psychological terms, this by no means would allow us to indulge in these presuppositions, especially if there is no evidence to support them. In particular would you agree with the suggestion here at this blog that Pattie Cottman played any role whatsoever in the ensuing conflict with Fr Paul?

    4. Sorry, but the issues of "incitement" began over a decade ago. This blog has only begun to chronicle them. Fr. Mike has done more than any priest behind the scenes to bring peace to this diocese. Everyone knows this...except maybe you.

      It was Fr. Mike who rescued the Archbishop from his disastrous appearance on KOLG where he mocked Arinze. (I will post the whole interview soon so you can see that he did this.) It was Fr. Mike who saved the Archbishop from agreeing to a lie to cover up for why the episode was not rebroadcast. It was Fr. Mike who set up the secret meeting between the Archbishop and Fr. Paul at the Carmelite Monastery where the two of them were to agree to a peace and all the Archbishop could offer was a direction to Fr. Paul to "cool it", which Fr. Paul, because of the goodness of his heart, actually took initially as an attempt at reconciliation when all it was an attempt by the Archbishop to save his own face.

      Everyone knows how hard Fr. Mike has worked to save this diocese. That's why his statement today is so frightening to your side. One more thing. No priest on this island has more good will from the people on Guam than Fr. Mike. That's a warning.

      As for Cottman, too bad. The facts are the facts. She refused to comply with not just the wishes of Fr. Paul but what is demanded by Canon Law for the celebration of the Eucharist (in a consecrated space unless an exception is necessitated). And shame on our Archbishop and the neo priests for continuing to VIOLATE this!

      It doesn't matter whether she had anything to do directly with his removal after that. The confrontation is what was reported to the Archbishop and he ultimately acted on it.

    5. And go ahead. I'm just waiting!

    6. The problem with your sentiment, anon at 1:44 pm, is that while you are articulate with your words, it is the actions that speak for the NCW's influence in the situation with Fr. Paul.
      You also have your series of events misaligned. Everything preceded this blog. Do not try to skew history as we have well knowledge of whom and what truly incited the people of Guam. Junglewatch is only reporting what is already being discussed; shinning much needed light for the world to see.
      We are weary of yours and others attempts to turn this around as if Jungle Watch initiated the problems of our Archdiocese.
      Does no one at the Chancery have the courage and humility to at least address the issues with us, the laity? The silence from the hill is disturbing.

    7. Pale Mike, you can’t imagine the level of hope you’ve raised for us (members of this Diocese) with your courage and the stand you have taken! Know that you, and your support of Pale Paul, have the backing and support as well, of the members of the Catholic congregation on this island! We realize this was not easy for you. Thank you Pale Mike, may God continue to bless you and keep you!

      We pray too, that our Lady of Kamalen’s mantle be the veil of protection for our Clergy and our Catholic Diocese on Guam. May our Blessed Lady also lead the Archbishop to humbly open his eyes, ears, mind and heart to the issues at hand which have caused and continue to cause a hurtful division; lead him to address these issues and to humbly cooperate by initiating steps that move our Diocese forward toward reconciliation, healing and unity of the Catholic Faith and Church on our island.

  4. Fr. Mike,

    God Bless You for standing up. My prayers are with you. It took alot of courage to stand up and you did it. Hopefully, others will too.

  5. According to Diana, I guess I am labeled an anti-catholic because:

    1) I believe that the NCW is a church within the church
    2) I do not support the AAA because our regular Diocesan Priest are being shoved to the side.
    3) I believe that the Diocesan Missionaries should not become pastors of the churches ( they may be sent off to who knows where)

    WOW! Well I think Diana is all messed up. Being anti-catholic is strictly in my believe and opinion is not accepting the laws/decrees of the Catholic Church. I have my opinions of the RMS, the Statutes, etc regarding the NCW, but that does not qualify me to be anti-catholic.

    As stated in her post:

    DianaMay 28, 2014 at 12:01 PM
    Dear Anonymous at 6:31 p.m.,

    There is a difference between expressing an opinion and being Anti-Catholic.

    These are examples of expressing an opinion.
    1) The NCW does not follow the GIRM because they don't kneel in their Eucharistic celebration.
    2) Kiko's catechesis sounds more Protestant than Catholic.
    3) The NCW keeps secrets and won't tell what's in their Directory.

    Below are examples of Anti-Catholic statements and the reasons it is viewed as "anti-Catholic."
    1) The NCW is another church and they are trying to take over the Catholic Church from the inside.

    The above statement is anti-Catholic because they put the NCW as outside the Catholic Church and as another religion.

    2) Do not support or give any money to those churches that have the neos. Only support our local church that don't have the neos.

    The above statement is anti-Catholic. By not supporting those Churches, they are actually going against the Catholic Church herself because those Churches are Catholic.

    3) We need to get the RMS priests out. Only our local priests should be in our Churches.

    The above statement is anti-Catholic because the RMS priests are Catholic.

    1. Yes. Bear in mind, this is an example of Diana's formal logical argument!

      While we're at it, this is a good one too:

      DianaMay 26, 2014 at 6:10 PM

      Dear Anonymous at 2:0 p.m.,

      If you recall, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI celebrated Mass in the Neocatechumenal Way, and some of the problems that they addressed were that the admonitions are too long and the way we receive the Body of Christ sitting down. Other things that were not a problem were never addressed. The problems that they addressed were already corrected. Other things that they did not have a problem with continued on as is.

      That is the way the Catholic Church has always been. They only addressed problems. So, our written Statutes, was approved to ensure the unity between the NCW and the Holy See. Remember that the Catholic Church believes in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. We are not like the Protestants who always ask "Where is that in Scripture"? "

      Mmm, fascinating stuff....

      Yes, it is the problems that are the problem, Diana.

      I'd laugh if it didn't chill me to the bone.

    2. So did the Popes sit and hold the host as celebrated by the Neo? Did another NCW concelebrants do the honors? Makes a big difference!

  6. I am just waiting for Diana to take Pale' Mike's words apart!!!!!!!!!

    1. Me too! Fr. Mike has more good will from the community than almost any other single individual and not just from Catholics. If you want to see a community explode, go ahead, take him apart. Media organizations already in place.

    2. I find Pale' Mike to be a very diplomatic person. This I see in his homilies! Not only does he tend to his parishioners, he welcomes those who seek help from outside the parish!

      So, Diana, we are awaiting your critiques!

    3. She as already alluded an intent to skew his words. When asked if she believes Pale' Mike is "anti-catholic" [which she labels anyone who disagrees with her] she replied "That depends on what he says." In other words, Pale' Mike integrity is subject to Diana's interpretations.

    4. Theres no need to take Pale Mikes words apart. He chose and used them with a good heart. No where in there does he speak wrongly of the NCW, other than a division that exists in parishes where there are communities. Even with that statement Pale Mike did not pin the blame on the NCW. Maybe he wanted too but he didnt. This is the sign of a Priest who knows his role as a Pastor. Our priests are left with important decisions to make and Pale Mike comes in here to tell us, Lets work together rather than continue this trend of hurtful words and name-calling. The church on Guam has much more to work on than to keep dwelling on a case that has gone to Rome already. Pale Mike continues to be a great mentor to me. When I first decided to walk in a community, and before checking in at the hotel for the convivence, I made it a point to visit Pale Mike and get a word from him, Ive always considered him as one of my spiritual directors. I will never forget the advice he gave me, " Go and experience it! You wont know anything, you wont know if its for you or not". Ive worked for Pale Mike and we may have had our differences but Ive never lost respect for him.
      Theres nothing negative to say about Pale Mike because he knows what he is doing, he knows his purpose, he knows what needs to be done. Continue to pray for our Priests.
      You were all too fast to jump and make this a war. There was no war. In a war, you have two sides and this is not the case. We are all Catholics! We all belong to the same Church! We are One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic! This is the truth, and we must do whatever we can to maintain this. Joy!

    5. At anon at 3:10 pm. Almost a good comment until you decided to play "blame the victim" at the end. Apparently, this is our fault. This psychological head game you play does not work on the invulnerable.

    6. No. We are NOT "all Catholics". That's the point. We are fighting a heresy. And this a whole helluva lot more than about a case that has "gone to Rome." And in fact, even THAT would not have even happened if not for this blog.

    7. @ 3:10, actions speak louder than words, and based on the actions of the NCW, they don't belong to the Catholic Church; they belong to Kiko, who is trying to steal from the Catholic Church. The NCW is the Non Catholic Way. The Mother Church is under attack from within; a Trojan horse delivered by Kiko, filled with Kikobots. We are not anti-Catholic; WE ARE ANTI-HERECY.

      I have nothing against friends/family/strangers that practice a different faith, just as long as they are not trying to sabatoge mine.

    8. I guess all five Popes have failed to be great leaders in defending the Church? Oh wait, Tim will say, "Its not their job but the Bishops Job to protect the liturgy." But worldwide is the NCW. So all the other bishops have failed as well? I mean it all leads back to the Pope right? So are the Popes the ones who have allowed the Trojan Horse to enter? What do you think of the Popes decisions?

    9. The encouragement of New Religious Movements (NRM's), of which the NCW is just one of more than a hundred officially recognized by the Pontifical Council of the Laity, is standard practice for post-conciliar popes beginning with Paul Vi, who saw NRM's as a "movement of the Spirit" in the post-conciliar Church.

      Ultimately, however, in order for an NRM (even though the NCW rejects that label) to be officially recognized and codified by the Vatican, it must undergo a scrutiny and be prescribed a Statute, or as Pope Francis recently termed it: a "charter". From then on, the NRM's legitimacy and communion with the Church which authorizes its life, depends on that NRM's adherence to that "charter". And insofar as it deviates from its prescribed charter, it separates itself from the Church.

      In 2008, Pope Benedict prescribed a "charter" for the Neocatechumenal Way: its Statute. Insofar as the NCW subscribes to its charter, insofar as it adheres to its Statute, it retains its authentic membership with The Church. Insofar as it departs, negates, disobeys, or otherwise disregards its Statute, its charter, it compromises its legitimacy and departs from The Church.

      The NCW, in its communion rite, departs, negates, disobeys, and otherwise disregards its Statute, and blatantly and proudly so. In doing so it separates itself from The Church. And on this ground, we challenge it.

      HOWEVER! This is not only true for the NCW. It is true for every other Eucharistic celebration which departs from the Missal or its governing document - the General Instruction of the Roman Missal.

      So pastors, BE AWARE! Many of the atrocities of worship now embodied in the celebration of the Neocatechumenal Way began as LIBERTIES taken with the Roman Rite by priests who either allowed liturgy committees to have their way, or themselves, felt at liberty to augment, abbreviate, or otherwise improvise the Divine LIturgy.

      Restore the Liturgy, restore the church. Restore the church, restore the world. START! And you may want to start with the GIRM.

    10. Diana has rendered her decision regarding Fr. Mike's comment, which accompanied the inquiry: "Is Fr. Mike anti-Catholic?" Here is her response:

      Diana May 29, 2014 at 9:42 AM
      Dear Cathy,

      Father Mike was expressing his opinion and concerns. There is nothing in his letter that is degrading toward the NCW, the RMS priests, the Archbishop, or the Catholic Church. Although he says that he supports Father Paul, he also says that he respects the Archbishop and was hoping that he two would reconcile with each other.

      If you are unsure as to the difference between "expressing an opinion" and "being anti-Catholic" see my comment on May 28th, 12:01 p.m.


      Fr. Mike can now breathe a sigh of relief; Diana has declared he is not "anti-Catholic."

  7. Janet B - MangilaoMay 28, 2014 at 3:02 PM

    For a long time I have wondered how many priests have had private discussions with the Archbishop. I'm glad to see that at least Pale Mike has tried. Are there others?

    In following this blog site for some time now, I have seen so many pleadings to the Archbishop to lead and act. Now we know that even priests are ineffective in getting the Archbishop to act. The only exception may by his advisors, who should be summarily executed, or at least relieved of their roles.

    The only question remaining is why. Why has the Archbishop failed so miserably in his duty to act? Possible answers are:
    1.) Bad advice - while he has certainly gotten heaps of this from the Chancery officials whose salary we pay, no one should be ready to give this excuse as an out for Archbishop Anthony. He is a big boy, he knows right from wrong, he is our appointed leader, and the buck stops with him.
    2.) Ignorance - while again this would be a convenient excuse, I cannot believe the Archbishop is an ignorant man. Unlike some seminaries who reduce their standards to meet quantity goals, the Archbishop went to a Capuchin formation which has rigid standards. So did all our diocesan priests until very recently. Also, the Archbishop has several masters degrees, and he graduated from the U of Notre Dame. And, like Diana has lauded about others, "He has a PHD." LOL. Actually the D.D. is not in philosophy, but is a doctor of divinity. Ignorant people do not gather all these degrees, so it cannot be because of ignorance.
    3.) Lack of management skills - this may be a part of the problem. Certainly, in all those years in college, based on his field of studies, he likely had very few management skills courses. However, much of this is common sense stuff. If there is a problem, you as a manager need to address the problem. I certainly hope he would not counsel a husband to just ignore his wife if they have difficulties and the problem will go away. Also, the difference between treating your employees very well or treating them with indifference could be due to a lack of management skills. But when you treat them the way the Archbishop treats his sons, this is a very shrewd and direct management approach meant to achieve a particular end.
    4.) Pride - this is one of my two my likely choices. Maybe in the beginning the Archbishop actually thought the problem would just go away all by itself (see #3). But pretty quickly, any rational man would have seen the this problem was escalating beyond control. At that point he should have acted decisively. Pride is a good bet as to why he couldn't move. He was like a deer frozen in the headlights of an on-coming wreck, and it was pride that prevented him from averting disaster. His mind screamed in alarm: "Don't move now. If you do you will look weak and foolish. You are the Archbishop, so people will HAVE to do whatever you say." That is why pride is such a serious sin. You clearly see that what you are doing is seriously wrong, yet your pride prevents you from correcting the problem. Some one pointed out earlier this month, and rightly so, that the Archbishop could still salvage this wreck by taking action now. Yes, he will be criticized, and rightly so, but when the problem is resolved we will start to heal. But not until the problem is resolved.

    to be continued ...

  8. Janet B - MangilaoMay 28, 2014 at 3:03 PM

    continuation ...

    5.) Ambition - similar to pride, it is a very deadly problem. But beyond being frozen from action, ambition drives you to do anything necessary to achieve a goal. Again, this may have been a contributer early in this scandal. But again, at some point he had to realize that the problem had spiraled out of control. His goal for the Red Sash of a cardinal is forever gone at this point. Because he is not an ignorant man, one must assume he has already come to this conclusion, so ambition cannot be the reason he fails to act.
    6.) Outside Control - My other choice, and most likely the largest contributer to this horrible situation we are now in. Some one has a lot to lose if an outside agenda is not reached. I call this the Kiko-archy. Like all hierarchies there is a structure and one person sits on top, senior management sits close by, middle and lower management spread the message to everyone else. In the Kikoarchy, we know who sits at the top - that pointy bearded fellow with devilish looks. Just below him is his inner-circle, his top executives. Then come the middle and low level management, the catechists and responsibles. They put their necks out there to get the base ranks to follow in a lock-step march to kiko-tality, and state of eternal kiko-euphoria.
    Our Archbishop, while unique because he is the only bishop in the world who actually walks, is actually nothing more than one of the adherants, at the base. A brother to his community members. Now, if he were actually allowed to wear the red cap, he might be viewed differently. But for now, he is at the base step, merely doing what others tell him to do. In Neo matters, this is certainly his prerogative. But when the kikoarchy exerts influence into Church matters, and more specifically, to our Archdiocese matters, then he has compromised his responsibilities to an outside aggressor. Hence, my former reference comparing him to the famous traitor, Benedict Arnold from the Revolutionary War.
    Because the Archbishop has relinquished himself to the kikoarchy, not only in his personal life but also in his ministerial life, all his actions reflect the will of kiko. Without regard to the effects on the people of Guam, our Archbishop follows the persistent will of kiko.

    Just like the Gospels, there is always good news. The whole picture is quickly becoming clear. Even the hierarchy of the Church is starting to catch on to the real origin of the problems. Poor Pope Francis caught on in February, when he was lectured before the world by Kiko, in a rant that lasted 20 minutes! Look at the viewers to the Jungle, the highest source of viewers outside the US is Italy. I am confident they will soon step in. The "Boss" to Archbishop Anthony, is the Apostolic Nuncio in New Zealand. The Pacific bishops recently had a regularly scheduled meeting. Surprisingly, this brief meeting resulted in a multiple week absence by our Archbishop. Good speculation is that he had a few side meetings with Archbishop Krebbs. Was Archbishop Anthony there to plead for support, or was he detained to answer many questions from the numerous contacts Archbishop Krebbs has gotten from Guam concerned Catholics? Lastly, Jesus guaranteed that nothing would ruin our Church. The Church has been through several crisis in the past and has survived 2,000 years because of divine protection. Not even Kiko is more powerful than that, although he may not agree with me. So, I look at a man with too much pride, and I see an organization who views themselves above and beyond all laws, and I rest easy knowing that the finger of God is with us, and He will rescue us at the perfect moment.
    (Let us continue to pray that no lives are lost to the dark side of the kikoarchy until that perfect time comes.)
    By the way, while the matter with Fr Paul sits in Rome waiting to be heard, there is nothing preventing our Acrhbishop from resolving that issue...except #4 and #6.

  9. If anyone in anyway harms fr. Mike. Then rest assured it is instant war in the archdiocese. Please take this as a warming.

  10. God bless Fr. Mike for having the courage to speak the Truth.

  11. It would be in the best interest of archbishop Apuron to resolve the situation with his priest immediately in the internal forum.

  12. Junglewatch? jungle trash

    1. Anonymous? Anony mess. Try again.

    2. A another quick hit and run from a courageous anon at 314. Really the more it changes, the more it stays the same.
      Thank you for the persecution.....


Recommendations by JungleWatch