Saturday, July 5, 2014

RMS 101: IT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE OUR SEMINARY

From the beginning, the Redemptoris Mater Seminary was NEVER meant to be a seminary OF or FOR the Archdiocese of Agana. It was always going to be a seminary for the Neocatechumenal Way.


There is NO local option for local men who desire to serve our local church as priests and not be formed in the Neocatechumenal Way. And how interesting is it that a seminary for the Neocatechumenal Way would be established before a regular diocesan seminary. No other diocese has ever done that.

BOTTOM LINE: We were lied to.

Note: The excerpt is Article III of the By Laws of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary, Archdiocese of Agana. Much more to come on this.

37 comments:

  1. What the Hell! How much more do we not know about? Unbelievable...

    ReplyDelete
  2. They can go to the “Saint John Paul II Archdiocesan Seminary” in Malojloj. How many local men are you expecting to fill up the seminary there anyway?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you really don't know there's no seminary in Malojloj. This diocese, like many other small dioceses around the world, has no business trying to establish a seminary here. The population base is too small to support a REAL seminary, which is why we have always sent our seminarians elsewhere for formation. Given the "product" that we are now seeing flowing from RMS, it is quite evident that RMS is NOT a REAL seminary. What a shame. And in answer to question: NONE. Not while Apuron is bishop.

      Delete
    2. You stole this again? You should worked for a Tabloid.

      Delete
    3. You're saying that Guam is not capable of having a real seminary because of its population? Yet, we do have a seminary here. Two of them in fact. The priests coming out of the RMS are capable of conducting a regular mass. If these priests go, who's going to replace them? Are we going to ask the Philippines and other countries to loan us some of their priests?

      Delete
    4. They can stay. Bishop goes. Plenty of vocations after that. Just like before he became bishop.

      Delete
    5. 10:38. Let me help you with our English:

      You stole this again? You should HAVE worked for a Tabloid. (Tabloid would be small t.)

      Delete
    6. If they were so many vocations after that, why were we borrowing priests from the Philippines?

      Delete
    7. Before that, as in before Apuron. Guam had many vocations, priests and nuns. After Apuron. Slowed to a trickle. And what's wrong with priests from the Philippines? Given Guam's nearly 50% Filipino population, bringing priests from the Philippines would be a good thing to do. Bottom line. RMS was a LIE to the people of Guam. A multi-million dollar lie.

      Delete
    8. If Guam had many vocations before Apuron, then why were we getting priests from the Philippines? I didn't say that anything was wrong with priests from the Philippines. It doesn't make sense to say that we had many vocations, and then we had to borrow priests from elsewhere.

      Delete
    9. For many years and still till now, I always wanted to join the diocesan priesthood for this archdiocese. However, when one of the clergy members advised me from saying just that to the bishop due to him most likely telling me that I will have to be formed at RMS, I held back. Now that all of this out, more than ever, I want to become a diocesan priest. I'm just scared that I will be blackballed like Aaron Quitugua. If I had the money, I would pay my way through the seminary as a layman, since the bishop will not sponsor anyone to go to an off-island seminary. If I was fortunate to take that route, I would do so and wait for Apuron to be replaced and then ask admission to the priesthood.
      Is there anyone of higher authority I can write to? I would like to hear from the nuncio to resolve this issue.

      Delete
    10. Priests from the Philippines in the early days of archbishop Flores were incardinated into Guam. Archbishop Flores also invited seminarians from the Philippines who have become much loved and respected priests of Guam. They are also our sons ! A son of Guam is not just a native born. It is anyone who adopts our life and culture is sincere to make a home with us, and loves our people.

      Delete
    11. RMS is not a real seminary. Very alarming the no standard of priest it produces.

      Delete
    12. Yona property is in God's divine plan for the Church.

      Delete
    13. Yes, it is. For the good of entire Archdiocese. As it should have been from the beginning.

      Delete
    14. Yona property is governed/0wned by a board of directors of the neocatechumate way.

      Delete
    15. Let me simply reply, it better not be governed/owned by a "board of directors" of the so called Neocatechumenate. THIS BETTER NOT BE TRUE. The Truth will be known SOONER than later, Archbishop. P.S. Many of us are suffering stress related symptoms.

      Delete
    16. Archbishop needs to resign .

      Delete
  3. Impossible for Guam to ever keep a diocesan seminary archbishop knew this.

    Archbishop allowed all this for a reason and the reason becomes very clear to us. The hotel was purchased to be a neo seminary. By logic alone what purpose would a hotel of that size have for the archdiocese. We were all fooled by archbishop. Question now becomes how do we respond as concerned Catholics to this situation that faces our church.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Archdiocese could have had a pre seminary house of formation where seminarians could attend one year prior to st. Patrick's to learn basic foundation . But to establish a major seminary makes no sense at all for Guam. The hotel seminary was never meant for Huam he purchased it for the neo . Evidence is clear. Why don't you just admit to this archbishop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Appreciate your comments. But please proof read them before someone thinks you are a seminarian yourself.

      Delete
  5. Aren't NGOs (for profit or non-profit) required to file by laws with IRS/Guam Rev. & Tax? If so, doesn't this make it a public document?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. It's a public document. Go down to the business license branch and ask for a copy. It's $20. Or just wait till I post the whole thing. Actually, I was just going to let these idiots accuse me of stealing for a couple weeks. But whatever.

      Delete
  6. There are lots of public information available...one just need to ask or source the right place.
    It's stupid how these guys think that information should always be kept secret.....I guess this is what is taught at The WAY! TRUE Information is only given to the few privileged persons ..NOT THE ENTIRE MOVEMENT!

    JOY no Longer but SAD ;(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No!,,, don't say that. JOY IS OUR TRADEMARK!

      Delete
  7. Archdiocese has own vocations from the sons of Guam. Archdiocese welcomes Filipino seminarians who desire to make their home on Guam. There was no need for all these seminarians of the neo to come to Guam. Look at the problems since they arrived. Our community is divided. Archbishop is responsible for our present mess.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 3.06pm exactly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Archbishop very dishonest man. Hurts to say it but true. Not to be trusted

    ReplyDelete
  10. Do the local donors, especially the big corporations, know about the true purpose of the Yona seminary? It won't hurt to inform them about Article III, just in case they don't. Then, let them
    take it from there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't want to speak for any "big corporation" in particular. But normally big corporations are about big corporations. Thus they will give to both sides of the political fence. Keeping good relations with the archdiocese and a good public face is just their business. The only way to change their giving practices is to ultimately discredit those organizations (or persons) which they give to. It has to be come "bad business". That said, there is nothing keeping individuals from contacting those corporations and letting them know how you feel about their support of an institution that is established to undermine the Catholic Church as we know it.

      Delete
  11. Scrolled to see where I could stick this statement from a Rabbi on the Neocatechumenal way. Too many headings so this will have to do.

    "['Holocaust' Dispensationalist Theologian] Rabbi Irving “Yitz” Greenberg told The Jewish Week that The Neocatechumenal Way is “primarily a lay inspiration group that has done no missionary work and has no missionary interest. They speak about Israel like the Evangelicals do, that the Jews are ‘God’s people.’ And Israel is ‘God’s Promised Land.’ They specialize in a respectful attempt to help Catholics better appreciate the Jewish people and the Jewish religion, as well as raising an awareness of how much the Jews have suffered, including from Christians."

    ReplyDelete
  12. Who legally owns the Yona seminary? If it is still the Archdiocese of Agana, are there any liens or encumbrances on it that would or could alter the picture of legal ownership?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guessing we will have some of these details soon. Waiting patiently.

      Delete
    2. Yes. Details coming soon. Thanks for your patience. It takes time to get it right.

      Delete
    3. The question will be not who "owns" the seminary property, but who controls it. Stay tuned.

      Delete
    4. Welcome, Tim. We understand.

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch