Thursday, September 4, 2014

THE REAL REASON MAY BE FAR WORSE

Over the last couple of days, Archbishop Apuron and his team of bone-digging tyrants have "met" with the Presbyteral Council and the Pastors. The object: to further trash Msgr. James Benavente...in his absence of course. 

So expect another big spread soon in the U Matuna with all sorts of selective information trying to show Msgr. James in the worst possible light. 

And of course don't expect to see any information about the finances of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary - even though that entity sucks more money out us than anything else. 

At least one person at one of the meetings wondered out loud why Msgr. James was not asked to be at the meeting to answer to the charges. And of course, even the word "meeting" is a euphemism. The Archbishop doesn't "meet" with anyone. He hauls people in and reads a prepared list of charges, then he runs to us and tells us that he "consulted" with them. 

There is no doubt that given the chance, and as already demonstrated by a team of financial professionals, Msgr. James could explain most of the issues and answer most of the questions that the Archbishop says he has. But the Archbishop isn't interested in answers. He is only interested in sending Msgr. James to hell. 

Let's say that every charge against Msgr. James is correct and substantiated. 

Then, even so:
  • What father, finding a son to be a problem, first runs to the neighbors? 
  • What father of a wayward child opts to trash his child publicly? 
  • What father even thinks of condemning one of his children to the others? 
  • What father unilaterally punishes a son without allowing the least explanation? 
  • What father does not hold out the least chance for reconciliation but prefers to wreak hell and havoc on his son's life?

Even before disciplining our smallest children, we parents at least ask "Why did you do that?" and give them a chance to explain.

But no, nothing. Not the smallest opportunity for Msgr. James to respond, explain, answer questions, or even see the charges brought against him. Not the slightest chance for justice. Just these kangaroo courts in the press, with the pastors, with the councils, all publicly trying and condemning the accused in the absence of the accused. Even at its worst, not even the Inquisitors did that. 

So why is the Archbishop doing this? Why is he dragging Msgr. James through all this public mud? Why is he hell bent on destroying this man and grinding every last memory of him beneath his inquisitional jackboot?

Because Archbishop Apuron is afraid. Because Archbishop Apuron is fearful. Only fearful men do such things. Only men caught in irreversible lies lash out this insanely. However, in Archbishop Apuron's case, the real reason may be far worse. 

Let's see what he does with all the dead bodies he and his kiko-tyrants are digging up over at the cemetery. Let's see if he tries again to publicly destroy Msgr. James in the U Matuna or any other public way. Let's see if he again drags his soiled laundry into one of our schools and besmirches our children with his filth. Let's just see. 

In fact we hope he does. It is said that Rome only pays attentions to problems in dioceses when the issues are sex and money. But there is another one, an even bigger one: the public trashing of priests by their bishop. 

Conflicts between bishops and priests are common, but they are normally handled internally. Going public with such conflicts as Archbishop Apuron did with Fr. Paul in his press release of July 22, 2013, and with Msgr. James with his press statement of July 31, 2014, is simply something no sane bishop does. 

There's a tip. And Rome just got it. 


39 comments:

  1. Tim, it was YOU who brought it out to the media, not the Archbishop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL, Archbishop. I thought you told people not to "read the blogs". Oh well. Welcome. My first post on the Fr. Paul story was on 7/23/14 in which I linked to a Pacific News Center report. Your Chancellor sent out your press release the day before on 7/22/14. Who went to the media first?

      As for Msgr. James, you were a bit smarter, you didn't give anything in writing to Msgr. James so that neither I nor him could go to the media. I could only comment on what was already known: that you were getting rid of Msgr. James. I had nothing in hand as per your charges until you sent them to the press on July 31. The press then forwarded me a copy.

      BTW, are you prepared to explain about the 100k in the luggage lining?

      Delete
    2. 6:35 It doesn't matter who brought it out to the media. Keeping secrets do not erase the TRUTH. If this whole mess wasn't brought our to the media the lies, deceit, and hurt coming from AAA will be much worse. It's bad enough as it is! GET IT?!

      Delete
    3. Tim you got your dates wrong and your priest wrong. We're talking about Monsignor James not Fathter Paul. And You didn't link the story on July 23rd because Monsigor was taken out on July 26th.

      Delete
    4. Anyone who places 100k in the luggage lining may well have problems entering any airport of the world. Most countries only allow you to carry in 20,000 USD max. Some places much less.

      Delete
    5. 100k??? DO TELL!!!

      Delete
    6. 6:35 you are hopeless.

      Delete
    7. You are correct. Here is the correction:

      My first post on the Fr. Paul story was on 7/23/13 in which I linked to a Pacific News Center report. Your Chancellor sent out your press release the day before on 7/22/13. Who went to the media first?

      As for Msgr. James. He was "taken out" on July 25 by Archbishop Apuron, but was not given the Decree of Removal until the morning of July 26. In any event, Archbishop Apuron went to the press on July 26.

      But it really doesn't matter does it? Rome cannot discipline a lay person for saying what he wants to say on a blog. But Rome CAN DO SOMETHING about a bishop who publicly trashes his priests, as Apuron has done, regardless of who went first.

      How sad that you are willing to elevate my status to that of Apuron's in order to defend him. Or should I say, how said that you are willing to degrade Apuron's status and responsibility within the church to that of a mere layman with a keyboard.

      Delete
    8. Also note. Msgr. James was given a Decree of Removal not a Transfer. The two are very different things, especially with the defense Apuron is trying to concoct. This will be fun. Another huge blunder. Archbishop, please get yourself a new canon lawyer so we can at least level the playing field. You are too easy.

      Delete
    9. Correct it was a decree of removal which was invalid because the process of removal was not followed according to church law. Unless the law is followed decisions of the archbishop are invalid. Infact most of what archbishop does are invalid actions.

      Delete
    10. Tim - you should be offended that anyone is trying to put you at the same level as our friend the baloney-meister Tony. You try to reveal the truth behind situations. Whether it be abortion, politics, priest-bishop relations, or Church leaders lining of their own pockets, your focus is on revealing the truth.
      On the OTHER hand, we have Tony Baloney trying to hide in the shadows, hoping no one will notice or see the terrible things he has done. And when caught in the deed what does he do...he lies! Tony Baloney has been foolishly caught in embarrassing lie after embarrassing lie. So many times has he been caught in his lies I have no other name for him but Tony Baloney.
      You represent people, and our desire to have a Church we can trust and have faith in. We want a Church we can run to when we are hurt, when we wound ourselves by sin, when we are grieving.
      Tony and his band of thieving priests and catechist represent the worst of human nature which happens to lurk in the darkness of God's institution.
      Any comparison never elevates you to his status, because he has abdicated his status of descendant of the apostles. Any comparison cannot lower his level to yours since he has lowered his level to the basest level of sinful depravity all by himself. He has tarnished the office of bishop.
      Any comparison to you and Tony could be called a case study -
      Tim Rohr - Catholic seeking truth
      Tony Baloney - thug trying to usurp power for selfish needs
      Any questions?

      Delete

    11. Janet, majority of young catholic students follow Tim Rohr to a greater degree than Tony. Tim speaks with integrity, Tony has honesty issues.

      Delete
  2. Let's say that every charge against Msgr. James is correct and substantiated? Really? Then that means your finance council was wrong and the arch wasn't a liar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. English must be your second language which is why you didn't get the "Let's say" part. So let me help you. "Let's say" is to propose a hypothetical. "Let's say" means "even if it was true though it's obvious that it is not." So "Let's say" that the finance council was wrong and the Archbishop isn't a liar (at least in this one instance), then the question becomes what underlies his public, vicious, and unjust action against a spiritual son? We know why. The Archbishop obeys a different master.

      Delete
    2. 6:40. Let's say you understand English. Lol

      Delete
    3. Let's say that all idiots should stay out of the jungle until their IQ reaches ice box levels. Capiche?

      Delete
  3. Archbishop needs another scapegoat for camouflaging reign of deceit. The trouble with lies and dishonesty is that it hides even more of the same. the Archbishop is extremely desperate and I hope the people he surrounds himself with Neo and employee sympathizers will have the fortitude to recognize it for what it is,dishonesty and deceit against the Catholic Church.
    What did Monsignor have to gain personally and how would he have been able to mismanage singlehandedly if there was a Financial Council and the endorsement would have been always from the Archbishop's signature? There is irreparable breach of trust that he will NEVER regain.
    Please follow Kamalin Karidad. We have supported the mission of feeding the hungry in good Faith and we distrust that Deacon Tenorio in his blind obedience to the Arch will have sound judgement. Please follow Redemptoris Mater Seminary finances in particular. We are not convinced that the Archbishop sleeps well on this matter.
    To everyone else supporting the pursuit of Truth and those misled sympathizers of the Archbishop. Pray earnestly . Bridges to tear and destroy Catholocism is staring at you right in the face. The father of all lies and the demonic influences of satan is present on our island.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sounds like a desperate attempt to blast the archbishop before you're final hoorah.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL. No worries. With AAA I'll never run out of material. He's no longer releasing documents, but he can't help but run his mouth.

      Delete
    2. And besides, as long as people like you are afraid to use your name, I WIN!

      Delete
    3. Ha! Anon 7:54 AM is another delusional fruit that didn't fall far from the fantasy tree. "Minus well" keep acting like the Archbishop is infallible, eh? All the facts stated within this blog is an illusion, I guess. Maybe in addition to being an artist/folk song writer/support group leader, Kiko is also a magician?

      Delete

    4. Yes,dry bones image again. Giants have been moved to enter the Jungle. what if the giants breath life into the dry bones?

      Delete
    5. Tim, you won since the beginning, and you got a million views in the process. Your point?

      Delete
    6. 10:21 Kiko the magician makes meelions and meelions of monee disappear. He's a master illusionist as well. Oh, let's not forget master of disaster..

      Delete
    7. @ 12:05 PM Numbers seems to be your goal. Truth is ours.

      Delete
  5. Well, what about all the things Msgr. James has said publicly about the Archbishop? Oh, wait...

    So glad the Most Rev. Anthony S. Apuron, OFM, CAP. D.D. can sleep at night. Sa' ti mamaigu si Yu'os.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's say that there may be a possibility that....the Archbishop may be lighting a fire under his own shoe, then what?

      Let's say that there may be a possibility that...the Archbishop is also covering up another scandal, then what?

      Let's say that maybe I will let SNAP know about another scandal that needs to be investigated...then what? Saipan watch out!

      Delete
  6. From the Mayo Clinic: Narcissistic personality disorder

    Click on the "Symptoms" link.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BINGO! The symptoms fit! Anon. @ 8:24 you may have saved the diocese a bunch in medical bills! Too bad the legal fees will gobble this up. Archbishop, please, just say " I am sorry...".

      Delete
  7. The arch needs to put out the fire that is out of control. He should use water instead of gas.

    ReplyDelete

  8. Certainly question of honesty regarding Archbishop.

    ReplyDelete

  9. Arch needs to quench the fire now out of control. And best to use iced water .

    ReplyDelete
  10. okay, i'm in suspense. if all his extreme acts are out of fear, what is archbishop apuron afraid of?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That Kiko the Magician will be losing another lovely assistant, maybe?

      Roma ti sta guardando, Arcivescovo!

      Delete
    2. if it's losing his archbishop's chair that apuron is afraid of, then what he's been doing is surely one of the fast tracks to get there. so, i don't believe it's fear of losing his position that is motivating him.

      looking in general terms and not particularly about archbishop apuron: what is the biggest thing that a fully immersed and fully invested member of a cult afraid of? rejection by the cult. expulsion from the cult.

      looking in purely secular terms: what does an ordinary, normal person fear the most? pain, suffering, death.

      Delete

  11. Money Laundering could be next on the list!

    ReplyDelete

  12. Rey, hit the nail on the head. I guess you learning the intrigues of the past which slowly enter the jungle. To understand the opera go back in time, and remember the opera only ends when the fat lady decides to sing! It is the final opera song that brings the opera to a close.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think the archbishop wants to destroy Msgr. Benavente's reputation so Rome won't appoint him the next Bishop of Guam. I'm hoping the powers that be in Rome can see through this plot and sees Msgr. Benavente's good character and worth. Msgr. Benavente would be our best hope to heal the authentic Catholic Church and rid us of this NCW menace.

    ReplyDelete

  14. Conflicts now being made public between bishop and priests in Guam is a major concern for the church. Unfortunately, there are a number of events which have not been recorded in Junglewatch of conflicts between bishops and priests. Only now are they being made public.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch