wrote to the Guam Pacific Daily News:
Regarding the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, I was never incardinated there. On one occasion, when I asked to celebrate occasionally with a group of families, I was not granted faculties for a divergence with the then-Archbishop of Los Angeles, Cardinal Roger Mahoney. This decision had nothing to do with the defamatory accusation above-mentioned since the name of Cardinal Mahoney was recorded in the same list.
However, on the same day the Associate Press reported:
In 2011, Wadeson asked the Los Angeles archdiocese for authorization to minister once more in Los Angeles because he was traveling in California.
The archdiocese refused and contacted archdiocese officials in Guam after learning he was working there, said archdiocese attorney Michael Hennigan.
Wadeson stated that his inability to obtain faculties in Los Angeles "had nothing to do with the defamatory accusation" and that the denial was a result of "a divergence" with Mahony. Wadeson makes it sound like he and Mahoney couldn't see eye to eye on something.
However, after Wadeson inquires with L.A. they CONTACT "officials in Guam after learning he was working there"!!!! Hmmm. I guess they wanted to let "officials in Guam" know that Wadeson and Mahony had a disagreement.
Anyone feel like they are being lied to? Sorry, Fr. Wadeson. This isn't working. Not sure how much longer I can defend your story. Obviously your beloved Archbishop and your Neocat communities aren't even trying.
Of course they'll call it "persecution". However, persecution implies a willingness to accept said persecution. You, however, have threatened to sue anyone "who will advance this calumny". Well, add the Associated Press to your list.