Saturday, May 10, 2014


Dear Archbishop Apuron,

Did you notice? Did you notice that you and your priests are irrelevant to the hierarchy of the Neocatechumenal Way? Diana explains:

If your next question is 'why we consume the Body of Christ sitting down, ' the answer is because we are told to do so by the Team Catechists. The members are obedient to the Team Catechists who is in communion with Kiko Arguello who is in communion with the Pope. According to the Team Catechists, these instructions came from Kiko who in turn received the same instructions from the Pope
Sure, Diana is just a blogger, a "walker", for eight years "she" said. But "she" is not telling us anything the rest of us have not been seeing for much longer than that. What we have seen, heard, demonstrated, and witnessed is that you and your priests are but placeholders, necessary for now, yes, but to be discarded once Kiko completes his revolution.

The "chain of command", the hierarchy of the Kiko-church is just as Diana calmly explains: Pope - Kiko - Catechists - Members. You and your priests/presbyters are nowhere to be found. Oh, sure, they use you because they have to for the sake of legitimacy for now. But as you can see, you matter not a wit in their chain of command. 

True, those words are just a repost of what someone copied from her blog, and she may have even deleted them by now after realizing just what secrets she has given away. But it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter because THIS ISN'T A SECRET. Everything posted there is not only widely known by everyone who is not in the NCW, but is in fact accepted and celebrated as dogma by everyone who is IN IT...and we have to assume THAT INCLUDES YOU!

Archbishop, in our Church, the Catholic one, our hierarchy goes like this: Pope - Bishop - Priest - People. This is what we want to see, and this is what we DON'T see in this diocese. And now we see it clearly and calmly explained by the information godhead for the local communities of the Neocatechemenal Way, all of which are under your auspices...or are supposed to be. 

But, AGAIN, it doesn't matter who "Diana" is or what "she" says, "she" is only confirming what all of us on the "outside" have been watching and wondering and shaking our heads in disbelief about for a very long time. 

And so, if all that is necessary is Pope - Kiko - Catechist and NOT Pope - Bishop - Priest, WHAT ARE WE DOING SPENDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR A SEMINARY? 

Lastly, just a heads up. For several months I have been approached by people who are willing to finance a public campaign exposing the problems in the Archdiocese. They are willing to pay for space and time in the public media. They believe that the exposure of these problems has to go beyond this little blog and mere notes to the nuncio. I advised not to do that yet. But if you start seeing any of this in the paper, just know that I'm not the one paying for it. 


  1. I think the path taken here ismPope-Kiko-Itenerants-Catechists-Members.

    If this is the case where all these directives must go to this chain of command, then the Archbishop must be a puppet. The Yes Sir, No Sir, and if you say so Man.

    But then again, what can one expect when his homily and I repeat, during the mass of the Chrism said "I am sensitive to,critism, but I find strength in the community". His strength comes from the community and he seems to have forgotten that strength comes from God through faith and prayer!

    I am not a perfect catholic nor am I a living saint, but I do know that my faith within the Catholic Church helps,sustain me and that Christ will carry me through what ever ordeals I may encounter. Many people carry their crosses. So,e may be heavier than others, but Christ wouldn't give you a crosses to carry if he knew you could not handle it.

    On another note, if the seminary was free and given to the Archdiocese, then why is there such a push for the,property to be signed over to them?

    1. Yes, this is very complex. Do not ever underestimate their lay hierarchy built in order to carry on a very strict and direct chain of command from the top of the movement to the very bottom where plain members exist. Very true, no priest is included in this hierarchy at all.

      Above individual members in the bottom there is the responsible who dictates in the community following higher directives. Then you have an elder of the responsibles of a larger assembly of communities, this person is usually the leader of the 1st (oldest) community in the parish. Above the elder are the catechists, but don't forget, all catechists have their own catechists in an upward chain who catechized them in the first place, and then their catechists and their catechists, etc. Locally, you have on the top the mission families and the itinerary catechists of a given geographic area. On the highest level of the whole movement, of course, Kiko and his top dogs are sitting. So the chain of command goes like this:

      Kiko --> other "top dogs" --> itinerary catechists --> mission families --> catechist teams in parishes, top layer --> (...) intermediate layers --> bottom layers of catechists --> elder responsible --> community responsible --> members

      No wonder you feel like a grain of dust in a kikoite hierarchy. At lest this is what current and former members say. They don't know why do they follow the command of others. But they do, without thinking. Because "everybody does". This is what experts call psychological conditioning of servitude.

    2. With the sending of priests as missionaries, the hierarchy goes as Kiko - itinerant (Fr. Pius)-Archbishop! One needs to understand that once these men are priests (RMS) their responsibility is to the mission on Kiko, not to the Archbishop or the diocese that they are ordained in.

      The Archbishop is told where to send them, not the other way around. What a joke!

    3. I’m curious: According to Kiko’s "chain of command" as illustrated by Anonymous (May 10, 2014 at 4:21 PM), just where would Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron be? Being a relative “newcomer” in this 50-year-old organization, he can’t be on the same level as Kiko and other "top dogs"; but just how far beneath them is he? Is he a member of a catechist team? Is he an elder responsible? Is he a community responsible? Or is he “just a member”?

      Whatever the Archbishop’s NCW role is, it’s evident that in Guam, the NCW is not “at the service of the bishop as one of the forms of diocesan implementation of Christian initiation and of ongoing education in faith,” per their Statute Article 1 § 2.

    4. He is one of the "brothers".

  2. For all those who thought that Father Adrian left because he was passed over for the title of Msgr. that is not the reason. Father Adrian was sent to Denver by Father Pius to help promote the NCW. He is now considered a diocesan missionary just as all the other diocesan priests who are now walking in the Way. They too can be sent anywhere. They are now under the wings of the RMS and must abide by its rules. No ifs, buts or ands about it.

    A Barrigada parishioner who once walked!

    1. Not true we on the inside know what happened.

  3. Wasn't the Archbishop introduced in Rome by Kiko in February as Archbishop Anthony Apuron, Redemptorist Mater Capuchino? I didn't hear Kiko introduce the other Bishops or Archbishops as. Redemptorist Mater Jesuit, Benedictine, Dominican, etc. What gives? Was this some kind of recognition he needed, that heads turned to see who this Archbishop Apuron, Redemptorist Mater CAPUCHINO was? Did he need to be in the spotlight again? Does this title now move him closer to the in crowd?

  4. Stop giving money to the archdiocese and you will remove the neo. Very simple. No more letters, just stop the money to the chancery.

    1. Just an aside. I would like to continue to differentiate between the Neos (mostly innocent people) from the Kiko's (mostly not innocent people). However, it's a bit more than just the money. Kiko and his gang are fabulously wealthy - not necessarily personally - but they have control of vast assets and can summon millions in an instant. This is why so many bishops have been so easily bought. Kiko is not about to let his pearl of Oceania go away that easily. He will see to it that it floats. While we certainly can withhold contributions, we must find creative ways to fund our parishes and other ministries apart from the "seminary". Other than that, the theological, liturgical, and ideological wars must be waged until...

    2. Hey Anon at 7:30 a.m. That's a great idea. Let's shut down the Archdiocese of Agana and the chauncery, then there won't be anymore neos, no more seminary. and those foreigners can get out. Only Guam men for the priesthood. We need to stop this archbishop, and the only way is to shut down the archdiocese of Agana and the chauncery. That'll solve everything.

    3. Correct. Today on Guam we have to be more creative and not follow traditional ways of giving money to the church. For example parishioners can privately form groups club their weekly offerings together and say buy a supermarket gift card so father can buy goods. Look for ways to assist father without money going through the parish. Infact you want to give as little cash as possible to collections, but yet yet je father pay the parish bills. It can be done and ,ah already be being done.

    4. Thank you, Anonymous (May 11, 2014 at 7:43 PM), for mentioning that parishioners must continue to support the needs of the pastor and/or the parish, without dropping the money into the collection basket. The suggestion you made — parishioners pooling funds for a supermarket gift card for the priest — is a very good and practical one!

      Other possible methods of support I’ve heard from friends include:
      • Give the money directly to the priest in the form of Mass Intentions;
      • Purchase the wine and (large and small) hosts used for the Mass;
      • Write checks payable to the bank or one of the utility agencies (GPA, GTA, GWA, etc) to help with the parish debts;
      • Pool funds to donate cleaning supplies or purchase gift cards/certificates for said supplies on a regular basis;
      • Provide flowers for the sanctuary on a rotating basis among families/groups.

      Some priests might be open to being approached directly with offers of support that “circumvent” the usual method (collection basket) and be willing to suggest ways you can help mitigate the financial obligations of the parish. Others might be hesitant to discuss financial matters, leaving it up to you to figure how to best help your parish.

      Whatever the case may be, as Tim pointed out, it is important to find creative ways to fund our parishes. We cannot abandon our parishes and pastors just because we don’t want our hard-earned money to be diverted to The One Cause near and dear to the Archbishop.

    5. Ok, so we give directly to the pastor, and with much of parish expenses covered by our creative support this concern arises: will sunday collections now be tapped by pastor (as parish contributions for AAA) to void loan and meet AAA goal set by Archbishop? This can not be right, could it?

    6. Anonymous (May 12, 2014 at 8:44 AM), you raise an interesting point. If the MAJORITY of the parishioners band together and take a “creative approach” to support their pastor/parish leaving only a few die-hards who continue to drop money into the collection basket, the Sunday collections will be small enough so as not to make a difference should the Chancery decide to demand the entire collection — which, given what we have read via this blog, is not beyond possibility! The parish will thrive — power, water and telephone bills will be paid, the debt for the building fund will continue to decrease, church and cleaning supplies will be available, flowers will decorate the sanctuary, Father will have food in his pantry and his refrigerator — IF parishioners can bond and come up with a Plan to support the parish OUTSIDE the collection basket.

      One of the problems with the local AAA is that all the money flows only in one direction: to the Chancery. My curiosity was piqued by a comment I read on “Diana’s” blog so I checked various AAAs in the US and discovered that, unlike the version we have on Guam, other AAAs actually have a two-way flow of funds: from the parishes to the Chancery and back to the parishes. Imagine my surprise in discovering that dioceses/archdioceses return funds to the parish level via allotments to “parishes and schools”!

      In his AAA message, Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore actually states: “One-quarter to one-half of every dollar given to the Appeal is returned to your parish, which can be used for tuition assistance, capital projects and parish specific programs.” It’s interesting to contrast Archbishop Lori’s message with the January 2014 post “Meeting Adjourned” which contained the following:
      “When the Archbishop was asked point blank if the amounts indicated on the 2014 Estimated Annual Appeal Allocations was his decision, he confirmed that it was. Recognizing that there was no interest in their input, another brave member of the clergy, realizing that they had been hoodwinked into another waste of time, called for the meeting to be adjourned and it was.”
      Also in another January 2014 post “He Wasn’t Joking” we read that:
      “Upon receiving the ‘assessment chart’ the other day at the clergy meeting, one pastor, known for his wisecracking, asked the Archbishop that if he couldn't meet the required amount, should he take out a loan. The Archbishop answered: ‘Yes’. And he wasn't joking.”

      Where Archbishop Lori promises that his parishes will see a return of part of their donation, all Archbishop Apuron does is stand with his hands outstretched, demanding “Gimme, gimme, gimme!”

      Clearly the AAA has a far way to go to reach its goal amount. As of this past weekend, the U Matuna Si Yu’os reports that $64,831.96 — about 25% of the goal amount — has been contributed. Considering that Pentecost is a little over 3 weeks away as of this date (12 May), it is highly doubtful that the Archbishop will get what he wants.

    7. Not right at All! Why should our parish be hurt because AAA did not reach its goal?

      If one notices, these RMS seminarians and priest have more ties with those walking the way than with those not in the way!

      If the Archbishop should demand that the parishes fork out the difference that they must meet, then he is a bigger sinner than those who only can give a minimal amount. Why make the parish suffer for the comfort of the boboys

  5. I agree with you Tim as the Neos are mostly innocent people and Kikos are leading a flock with false teachings. The Kikkos are the lost shepards.

  6. We need to distinguish between those people who just joined neo not knowing what they were doing and those who are cronie of kiko. The latter are the problem. Many joined the neo thinking it was like a mothers union only to find out ii is really a cult in the catholic church. Made worse on Guam because the bishop joined the cult and sold the archdiocese to,the kiko cult. Really selling the people, the assets of the archdiocese with him to a bunch of idiots we don't even know.mto protect our land, our church assets which we gave this archdiocese,we have to protect the assets from the dangers that archbishop Apuron has this church into. No more letters to Rome are needed. It's now about we the people of Guam taking charge ourselves and protecting our faith, our land, our finances, our assets, out church from people archbishop Apuron is selling it to. It's about we the people protecting the church because our archbishop is no longer fit to administer the temporal goods of this island.

  7. The collections during the mass, whether 1st or 2nd, always go to the parish fund. What goes to the Chancery is the monthly Parish Assessment and the other collections mandated by the Archdiocese or Vatican, e.g. Peter's Pence, Good Friday, etc.

    1. Peter's Pence and Good Friday, etc. and those other occasions happen only once a year throughout the year, there are so many more regular sundays in the year. It just means that even if it is claimed that sunday collections go to "parish fund" (of course it does!) it is from this "parish fund" that the "monthly parish assessment" is taken from.

  8. To Anonymous 8:45 AM, yes, the Monthly Assessment is a certain percentage of the parish annual income. All other expenses of the parish are taken from the parish fund.


Recommendations by JungleWatch