Thursday, August 14, 2014

A NOTE FROM ROME

Latest. Trip to Rome is still speculation. Only Korea destination actually confirmed.

A Roman observer noticed the post about Archbishop Apuron's recent departure. The only information I had was that he was headed to Korea. Later reports confirmed that he is on his way to Rome. This morning, I received the following:

This is August in Rome Vacation time in Vatican.  Bishops rarely travel to Rome in August without being called there by a Congregation. It could be possible Archbishop Krebs sent in his report and now the Congregation for the Evangelization of People's want to talk with him. Notice Cardinal Filoni was still in Rome in August and just left for Iraq but returning in couple days to Rome. Would not surprise me if Archbishop Apuron has been called to Rome. Not a good sign if a bishop is called to the Vatican.

27 comments:

  1. Monica SN - MongmongAugust 14, 2014 at 12:12 PM

    Toka! Great job on Jesse Lujan's show last night. Unfortunately, it was only a 1/2 hour. Is there a continuation?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I pray it's true.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rome is practically abandoned in August. Must be something importante. Hot as can be there, too. But, the heat is on here too, isn't Archbishop? If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. Perhaps handing in resignation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maybe processing of list people that need to be excommunicated here on Guam.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oops, my name is Eileen Benavente-BlaS.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "In leadership today, both secular and religious, many protect evil simply in their lack of action for good and against evil. Not choosing good versus evil is to choose. In today's world, there can be no in between - no indecision or gray area. If you are not for good you are against it."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sadly, Filoni (aka "the Red Pope") is the most NCW-friendly cardinal in Rome.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's about to see it's underbelly. But AAA would not be called in for his relationship with the neo's. He would be called in for telling Archbishop Balvo to buzz off, and for embarrassing the church by going public on Msgr. James. If the neo connection comes up, it won't be over the liturgical abuses, it will be about the illegal attempt to alienate the Yona property - something Balvo slapped him down for. BTW, it was reported that AAA did a little dance of glee after Balvo got transferred to Kenya. AAA made some remark about his being deported to "deepest, darkest Africa" as if the move was a demotion. I guess AAA doesn't know. Africa is where the church is growing the fastest. Oceania is a backwater compared to it. Word got to Balvo about AAA's comments. And I'm sure his replacement was made aware of it.

      Delete

  8. Archbishop Apuron did state that Archbishop Balvo was deported to " Darkest Africa.". He then made a dance and said he would be with the nigger boys.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If what you say say is really true (and I have NO REASON TO DOUBT IT), i.e. that the Archbishop did refer to the great country of St. Augustine of Hippo as the "Darkest Africa" and its people as "nigger boys", Apuron has insulted 20+ African Cardinals (including Cardinal Arinze), and hundreds of millions (maybe more) of Africans! Is he going to get away this too?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous (August 14, 2014 at 2:53 PM), how would you know that the Archbishop "made a dance and said he would be with the ****** boys"? Were you there to witness the event? Or is this the product of your imagination?

      As critical as I have been of the Archbishop, it bothers me to consider the the possibility that he would use such a hateful word! If your account is accurate, then it truly is a poor reflection of his character.

      Delete
  9. At 2:53,

    I hope you are not just making that up, using that word to build anger. If it is true then it is true, but It just makes me sad to think that the Arch would stoop that low.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope so also. I did not hear of that last word being used. However, I did hear of "darkest Africa", and it was confirmed. Even the words "darkest Africa" are disturbingly racist, or at least grossly condescending.

      Delete
  10. Rome will be uneasy with the now very public problems between priests and their Bishops. it seems such issues are now very public on Guam. it is not good for the public image of the church to see archbishop fighting in media with priests.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just some observations from carefully scanning through the names listed on the petition of support for Fr. Pius put out by the Neos in Guam.... 1. about an estimated one fourth to one third of those who signed the petition aren't even living in Guam (international neos?) 2. most of those listed hail from neo immersed parishes, namely Barrigada, Santa Rita, Chalan Pago. Neo-resistant Parishes such as Sta. Teresita, St. Jude and Santa Barbara have an estimated less than ten names listed from those parishes. Most of the signers come from San Vicente, Barriagad (given), Chalan Pago, Asan, and Sta Rita (makes sense). No prominent local politician is listed on the petition (prominent meaning gubernatorial,senatorial,judicial levels of government). Some areas of the petition are skewed. A case in point, 11 San Agustin names are listed (and those are all minors). The first name listed on the petition is Neo Priest Edivaldo Oliveira, followed by three female names, one highly suspected and reported to be Diana the neo-blogger. There are also numerous seminarian names listed. Another interesting fact is the repetitive use of Agafa Gumas, Santa Bernadita by numerous signers as their parish, even though their residence is a foreign country. This suggests that the signing of these names were initiated by one source, and hurriedly listed Agafa Gumas to expediate propagating signers onto the petition. Most names listed suggest isolated familial relations, possibly small numbered families who are members of the Way. So if you subtract all the seminarians listed, the foreign international names listed under agafa gumas, other international names, the neo priests listed, all that we're left with is a small cluster of neo families in support of Pius. Nice to know this!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I second your observation. I know some Members of the way that included their children. In fact, some of the children are barely a year old.

      Delete
    2. Question for Anon 4:22

      How does a politician help with the petition?

      Delete
    3. It's a petition for Fr. Pius. Of course a majority will be members of the Way. Did you expect Tim and Chuck's names to be on there?

      Delete
    4. I think the point was 1. A big chunk of those Neo who signed are not even from Guam and 2. Politicians = Power and Influence and the WAY having no politicians willing to put their names in print = NO POWER AND NO INFLUENCE. That's why billions are spent in lobbying politicians to push a group's agenda. Get it? SUMMARY, You're all appearing to be a very very pathetically small group of people, and maybe Tim and Chuck, plus that former Neo guy are right, your numbers are small and dwindling. Do you think with all the swell of bad press the NCW has been getting lately that your numbers will increase? You're a dying breed. Everyone out there thinks you're a bunch of brainwashed cult members, and your outspoken members' tactics from stalking minors, to just a basic lack of ability to debate and engage logically and intelligently have NOT been helping your cause. You all need a big image overhaul.

      Delete
  12. Archbishop, if the comment, attributed to you is correct, why did you send Edwin Bushu to Kenya? And, why do you allow African boys to be educated in the Yona seminary?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 4:44PM you racist bigot!!!!!!

      Delete
    2. @ 7:42,

      Please explain how 4:44 is a racist bigot. His/her comment is exactly the opposite. Your comment should be directed at the Archbishop, IF the accounts of his statement is true.

      Delete
  13. In times of perilous confusion we should take a step back.

    Isn’t that perhaps what we do in life? Faced with a confusing situation, difficult to untangle, which makes us worried and perplexed, we pause and then take a step back, avoiding the advance into danger.
    It is what we have done with regard to the faith.
    Yes, we believe that illustration renders the idea of our choices. We love the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ and our Mother, we love the Pope and the Bishop, but faced all around us with the evident confusion in Christian life, we reject an advance into ambiguity and uncertainty and we ask for the grace to stay with true Christianity.
    Essentially our position is that. Consequently we believe, and we have always believed, that we are not in disobedience.
    We would be in disobedience if we had invented “another [type of] Christianity”, if we had invented “our Mass”, “our pastoral work”, our catechism”, “our Way", "our catechumenate", if we had recognized “other superiors” outside the ones that the Church has given us in the Pope and Bishop.
    We do nothing of this sort. Judging the new pastoral, the new "neo rite” and the “neo catechesis” to be filled with confusion, we have simply availed ourselves of the rights that the Church has always recognized to souls at times of crisis: we follow past praxis and doctrine of the Church i.e. the sure one, the one before the crisis in the Archdiocese exploded.
    In fact, regarding the Mass, we don’t go looking for any ancient rite whatever, but we follow the forms of the ROMAN RITE, and other rites that come down to us from SACRED TRADITION (The Byzantine Rite, Armenia rite, Malabar Rite, Coptic rites, etc.) for they are of the same substance of the Mass of Ages. FOR WHAT WAS SACRED YESTERDAY IS STILL SACRED FOR US TODAY! We haven’t run off in search for something that we like, a mishmash of different rites, thrown in with Jewish liturgy, with a dash of flamenco music, making a Frankenstein of a rite which is merely 60 some years old and made by only 1 person, but we obey the reforms of the Church, the sure ones and only the sure ones. And this is what we are doing with all the other aspects of discipline regarding the Sacraments and the entire apostolate.
    Doing so, we are certain of not going outside the Church, which is the same one as yesterday and today. We don’t have two Churches, one before and one after the "neo way". No, there is only one Church! However, in that same Church, we have acceptable and unacceptable reforms; the reforms that place the faith and Christian life in danger, in conscience, are unacceptable. And since the Faith is the supreme good, no-one in the Church is permitted to expose it to dangers.
    We are fully aware of expressing a harsh judgment about the changes made by the “neo-church”. On the other hand, a dispassionate look at the disastrous results of “walking in the way” in the Church over the last decade is undeniable. The neo reform of the Mass, and subsequently of all Catholic life, is killing Catholicism in our islands. To deny it is ideology.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Let’s ask and live for the freedom of God’s children, who loving Holy Mother Church, say to Her legitimate Pastors: we continue with what you once taught us, and continuing in Tradition we are certain, despite our poverty, of our contribution to the edification of the Church Herself.
    We link then two positions that in conscience seem to us to be indistinguishable:

    1. A great love and respect for the Church

    2. A vigilance in never mixing the great Tradition of the Church with the ambiguities of the reforms of the Neo-Catechumenate and not only concerning the Rite of the Mass.

    Love and rigorousness, together.

    Moreover, loving the Church concretely means preserving Her treasure which was constituted by Divine Revelation i.e. Tradition and Scripture together. Revelation has declared and transmitted what the Church has always believed in and practiced, starting with the Catholic Mass.
    We err then, having understood the terrible danger inside Catholicism today, by crying in private and not intervening out of respect for the Church. The one who truly loves the Church defends Her.
    What appears to be disobedience is not. On the contrary, it is the greatest service that a believer can give to Her Mother.
    Those who talk of disobedience with regard to the “Judas’ and the un-salted” (not a nice term but we use it to convey the idea) , are doing so out of ignorance: they think the Church has absolute authority over everything. No, the Church obeys Jesus Christ - it is His Body; She must guard what the Lord has consigned to Her – Truth and Grace. The Church doesn’t invent, She transmits.

    For this then, the decision to stay within the surest Tradition of the Church cannot be illegitimate.

    The one who stays with the past is not outside the Church. On the other hand, the one who invents a new Christianity is out.

    ReplyDelete
  15. As was suspected one of the problems is the Archbishop is unable to work with priests. A number of serious priest issues in Guam and Archbishop calls the media for attention.

    ReplyDelete
  16. come on Msr. Filoni! ;)

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch