Monday, July 21, 2014

THIS IS ON YOU, ARCHBISHOP.

LA priest accused of molestation now in Hagåtña archdiocese



http://pacificnewscenter.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47048:snap-twice-accused-los-angeles-priest-now-working-on-guam&catid=45:guam-news&Itemid=156

Sadly, Fr. Wadeson may be wrongly accused. I personally have always thought so. However, these were questions that were never answered. And now they are being asked. Let this be a lesson to all who work with and for Archbishop Apuron. 

25 comments:

  1. Anti-Catholic Blog. Jungle Watch Hate Blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Truth is Hate. Kiko-think. LOL. More fruit.

      Delete
  2. Take action today, Archbishop. A public statement please.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 6:36am, good point,..exactly what the Pharisees of old said of Jesus. When you compare your NEO practice and the Pharisees, there's a stark similarity...quite ironic even after 2000 years.

    Boy did the Holy Spirit make someone look like a fool in yesterday's Gospel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jesus was not an accused child molester. Your neo structured mind blinds you to simple context.

      Delete
    2. . . . not to mention the irony of judgment in your "Gospel" statement.

      Delete
  4. Here it is again: it's that kiko-double-standard behavior demonstrated by 6:36am! Remember, kikos: when you point a finger, three fingers show your hypocracy and point three times back to you!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I can't see how the Chancery can keep quiet about this recent revelation. It is now out in the public that Archbishop Apuron has incardinated a ousted priest formerly from the Archdiocese of Los Angeles that has banned him and taken away his priestly faculties due to allegations of child molestation. These allegations were deemed credible enough for the Los Angeles Archdiocese to remove him. Why should Guam ignore this and accept this priest into our island. An explanation from the Chancery is definitely warranted to say the least. The people of Guam is entitled to know the status of this priest. If he is being financially sponsored and supported by the Chancery, what is his capacity on Guam? Where does he work and does his work bring him into possible contact with vulnerable children. Until he is totally cleared of the child molestation allegations for which he has been accused of, he has no business being a member of the Guam clergy. This matter should be reported to the Guam Police as well as to the Attorney Generals Office. Please, somebody take action on this matter before another child becomes the next victim.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Time for Archbishop to go off island. Let Lady Di take care. She's such a good spokeswoman.

      Delete
    2. We will probably never know. Most likely settled out of court with a gag order on it.
      Hopefully SNAP can get the truth.

      Delete
    3. http://www.kuam.com/story/26075589/2014/07/21/archdiocese-removes-priest-accused-of-child-molestation#.U83UbUYJ64s.facebook

      They couldn't keep ignoring the outcry! Good job, Tim for getting the word out.

      Delete
  6. Does a neo priest, incardinated in one diocese, need permission of the bishop in another diocese to be a priest (presbyter) for a neo community in that diocese?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In that case: Archbishop Cordileone, what say you?

      Delete
    2. He probably doesn't even know Wadeson is there since he doesn't work in a parish. He works only in the ncw

      Delete
  7. I think someone like parents should sue the archdiocese for exposing their school children to this risk.

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.guampdn.com/article/20140722/NEWS01/140722002/Archbishop-Apuron-removes-priest-from-public-ministry?odyssey=mod%7Cbreaking%7Ctext%7CFrontpage

    ReplyDelete
  9. Breaking news...Archbishop removes Wadeson from public ministry. My guess is he only did this because Tim exposed the truth and SNAP got involved. Archbishop should do even more and start rebuilding those bridges the nuncio spoke about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely. Now the subject of abuse is front and center. Pandora's box.

      Delete
  10. Actually, we don't just want him "removed from public ministry" but removed from this Diocese and anything connected to this diocese.
    return him to SVD to spend the rest of his years in contemplative prayer in a monastery somewhere. The allegations were serious enough for L.A. to remove him and ban him. If he was a diocesan maybe even defrocked.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doubt defrocked.

      Delete
    2. Actually, it's not Wadeson we want removed. He wasn't here anyway. Wadeson is not the problem. I repeat, Wadeson is not the problem. I repeat.

      Delete
    3. Got, it, Tim. wow. Are getting warm?

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch