I'm BACK. SEE BELOW.
This is a good opportunity. For once we see in one place everything "the other side" thinks of me. Of course the only reason they think of me at all is not because of me but because of what I do. And because what I do (tell the truth) is a grave danger to the lie they live (which is why they yet cower behind a pseudonym) the very survival of the myth they live depends on their ability to discredit me. I have no problem with that. Try all you want, but at least do it with the some facts. So here, let me help you.
"Tim has a history like all of us and he suffers like all of us."
"...he has also called the Archbishop 'evil'"
Actually, no. I have called what he does "evil".
"...and that shows a personal grudge."
Actually, no. I simply hate bullies and liars.
"Removing a priest because of disobedience is not considered evil".
Let's say that Fr. Paul was disobedient. He proved that he wasn't which is why AAA changed the charge, but let's say that he was. How about having the locks changed on his office even while he was at the meeting where he was told to resign? Is that evil? How about kicking him out of the rectory and leaving him no place to go (he was only assigned to St. Anthony much later)? Is that evil? How about stripping him of every opportunity to celebrate the sacraments without notice? Is that evil? How about kicking him out of the diocese and then blackballing him to other bishops? Is that evil? How about accusing Mr. Lastimoza of a crime he didn't commit? Is that evil? How about saying Mr. Lastimoza was a danger to parishioners when it was later discovered that AAA himself had permitted Mr. Lastimoza to work at the parish for three years? Is that evil? How about insinuating that Fr. Paul and Mr. Lastimoza were in a homosexual relationship? Is that evil? How about accusing Fr. Paul of using parish funds to build a private stairway to his room to facilitate late night drunken homosexual trysts? Is that evil? How about going to the media with a list of charges against Msgr. James before even giving Msgr. James a list of those charges or giving him the decency of responding? Is that evil?
"...there is a grudge that Rohr is holding against the Archbishop and i think it has to do with his history when he fought against the same sex bill proposed by B.J. Cruz."
Actually, quite wrong, but I will explain.
"Tim Rohr has made a comment on my blog (and even his blog), complaining about his ordeal as he fought against the same sex bill. He felt alone in that battle despite that God and His Church were with him. I remember the Archbishop and Deacon Jeff Barcinas speaking out against the bill in the media. Tim was up against both B.J. Cruz and Bill Pesch. Cruz was a judge and a lawyer before he was elected a senator. Pesch is a family law attorney fighting for gay rights. Tim asked the Archbishop if any of the attorneys (especially those in the Way) could take the lead in the fight. The Archbishop could find none."
Now you're on to something. Why was it, for all we hear about the wonders of the Way, that your people cower when it comes to putting faith to action? Where are you on the front lines of the abortion wars? Where are you on the front lines of any of the social challenges our church calls us to confront? Jesus did not just pray that the world would change, he publicly confronted evil wherever he found it, well knowing the price it would cost him. But you cower in your communities, venturing out only to pull practicing Catholics out of their pews. Such courage. What a bunch of fakes.
Let's get to the bottom of this. First of all, other than fixing my own toilets I am not a plumber and never have been. Second, I did not defeat the same-sex bill, so no, I did not think that it was my "determination and effort that defeated the bill rather than God."
Joe T. San Agustin, president of the Gov Guam Retirement Fund defeated the bill. Despite my efforts, public opinion showed that the bill would pass. Mr. San Agustin took the bill down with one letter to the legislature. The letter questioned the economic impact of same-sex unions on the retirement fund since it would create a whole new class of dependents for which the fund had no actuarial tables.
The letter had been delivered to the legislature at the outset of the debate over the bill and even before I got involved, but the letter was not publicly known until several months later when Ray Gibson hosted an on air "argument" between San Agustin and B.J about the impact of the legislation on the retirement fund. B.J. knew that once the people realized that there could be a danger to the retirement fund they would no longer be supportive. He withdrew the bill the next day. So there you go. The real history.
But about my agenda. The "visitors" too tried to get to the bottom of my "agenda". There was some suspicion that I was on a personal crusade to exorcise past demons or on a personal crusade to "purify the church." I don't mind saying that I stopped Archbishop Savio at that moment, looked straight at him and said: "No archbishop, I'm not trying to do either. I am the father of eleven children and I'm trying to get their souls into heaven and I am having to fight against my own bishop to do so." They knew what I was talking about and any discussion about my personal motivations came to an end.
But let's go on to why I'm "mad" at the archbishop. Actually I wasn't mad at him until I saw how he treated Fr. Paul, threatening him with a "arduous and painful closure to his assignment." This is pure bullying since Fr. Paul has no life outside the Archdiocese of Agana. Everything he has, even his ability to take care of himself materially depends on the archbishop.
But I was particularly motivated to come to Fr. Paul's defense because 3 years previously I had come to the archbishop's defense when he was being similarly bullied by B.J. Cruz, not about the same-sex bill, but about allegations of sexual molestation. Cruz did not outright accuse Apuron of sexual molestation, but he introduced two bills which if passed in the form he intended, would have surely brought the archbishop down - if not for his own actions, then for covering the actions of others.
To assist Sen. Cruz in flushing out Apuron, SNAP was recruited to come to Guam. SNAP had a long history of flushing out offending clerics everywhere and producing some handsome sums for their clients, and Apuron knew he was in trouble.
At the time, despite persistent rumors about Apuron, I believed him to be innocent, and for several weeks I publicly battled both Cruz and SNAP. At the height of the battle, when SNAP director Joelle Casteix came to Guam to investigate, I was called to the chancery to meet with the archbishop's defense team. No one on that team wanted to go public in Apuron's defense. I didn't know why. But I was about to find out.
I was handed a document with a statement and was asked to take it to the media. The statement was written to discredit Sen. Cruz' attempt to pass the "windows legislation" bill. The bill was designed to lift the statute of limitations for any sexual molestation related case. The real danger of the bill was not that it exposed Apuron but that it exposed the assets of the archdiocese. As you know, it was not the bishops who were made to pay in dioceses like Los Angeles and Boston, but the dioceses themselves, which is why victims were awarded hundreds of millions of dollars.
After reading the statement - which was designed to discredit both BJ and SNAP, I looked at the team and asked why we needed to do this, why don't we just call SNAP's bluff? Why don't we just demand that SNAP produce the evidence of what they are accusing the archbishop of? We don't have anything to hide do we?
I wish I could have video-recorded that moment. Eyes darted back and forth to each other and mouths started flapping without words. In my innocence, I had asked the dreaded question. There WAS something to hide and probably a lot to hide which is why no one on that team wanted to go public, so they recruited me. They recruited me because up to that point I had been the archbishop's fearless defender, or so I thought. In reality, I was just cannon fodder.
I am not going to use any names, but those who remember that period will remember that to appease the attackers, a certain priest was publicly thrown under the bus, a sacrificial lamb, fresh meat for the wolves to keep them happy and throw them off the scent of more dead meat. There was a problem with the priest, and it needed to be dealt with. But the real issue was Apuron's own liability in the matter.
Even at that point I did not turn on the archbishop. Even though he was willing to send me out to the wolves to cover a lie so he could (once again) escape out the back door while I kept the wolves at bay, still I did not turn on him.
Instead, I turned my efforts to protecting the church itself. In the end, and I wasn't alone in my efforts, we were able to get the bill defanged. The passed version of the bill permitted only individuals to be sued for damages, not organizations. This took the money out of it, and in most of these sexual molestation cases, money is the only real reason to come forward because the pain of having to come forward simply for justice appears to be hardly worth it for most.
With the ability to sue for millions out of the picture, the bill, which was signed into law, died a quiet death after its two year window with no takers. And even though there is still a provision in force for minors, there is still no money in it, which not only takes away a major motivation for the victims, but for any attorneys who might otherwise represent them.
So in a roundabout way, I (with the help of others behind the scenes) was able to save the archbishop from certain destruction since a major sexual molestation law suit against the archdiocese would have caused Rome to take him out in short order.
All of this cost me a lot. I am not wealthy. My wife and I have eleven children. We are a one income family. Neither my wife nor I have family on Guam to assist us. At the time I was running a Catholic bookstore, not because I wanted to but because no one else wanted to. At best it broke even - if I didn't pay myself. We were also recovering from some major medical bills relative to the birth of our 10th child and had just given birth to our 11th. However, (while the "Dianas" cowered in their holes) I didn't think twice about defending our church or its bishop, no matter what the cost.
And even after I found out about the attempt to use me to cover skeletons, the record shows that I had nothing to say about the archbishop and continued to defend both him and the church in the press until July 2013 when I learned about what he had done to Fr. Paul.
In 2010, I had helped to save Archbishop Apuron from his own "arduous and painful closure to his assignment", an arduous and painful closure that in fact he certainly would have merited all by himself. And yet, here was the man who I helped save, using the power that I had helped save for him, threatening a priest, regardless of whatever he accused him of, with an arduous and painful closure to his assignment and having the locks changed on him while they whipped him.
So yah, you might say I have a grudge. The archbishop was willing to arm me with a lie to save his office from the clutches of Sen. Cruz and SNAP who were out to prove that Apuron himself was a "danger to children". And here he was, 3 years later, flogging a helpless priest with a made up charge about another man's record.
Yah, that's what I call "evil". Even a plumber can figure that out.