Relax folks. We can call off the moratorium to the Annual Appeal. Feel free to start sending in your money. Deacon Larry Claros has put our mind at ease.
In today's U Matuna, Deacon Claros tells us that there is no difference between the two seminaries except that one "trains men to become diocesan priests who will eventually serve their particular diocese" and the other "trains men who will also be willing to be sent to a mission for a time."
Thank you for this clarification, Deacon Claros. Silly us to think that RMS was actually forming its priests according to "the life and practice of the neocatechumenal way" as its constituting document states.
So glad to know that this is the only difference. I guess all the differences in theology ("Jesus is a sinner"), pastoral practice, insults about the "meeellions and meeellions" we spend on food, disregard for local customs, disappearance of statues, and condescending arrogance that we see from the RMS boys is just a figment of our imagination.
And your explanation sure explains why we had to set up and fund a whole separate seminary just for the few guys who didn't want to go somewhere "for a time".
Yes, thanks for that, Deacon Claros.
By the way, we're sure you don't want to see the Archbishop get in any legal trouble with the Government of Guam. So you may want to see to it that RMS amend its articles of incorporation. They still say that RMS was incorporated to form priests only "according to the life and practice of the neocatechumenal way" and NOT to form priests for the archdiocese who are just "willing to be sent on mission for a time."
I'm not sure what the penalty is for a Guam corporation which violates its stated purpose for existing. I'll look into it and get back to you.
Meanwhile, for those of you who believe Deacon Claros, the Archbishop's pocket awaits.