Sunday, March 15, 2015

THANKS FOR THAT! DEACON CLAROS

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

We really are glad to know that both seminaries are forming regular diocesan priests for the Archdiocese of Agana, with the only difference being that the RMS guys will be going away "for a time" on an all-expenses paid trip courtesy of the people of the Archdiocese of Agana.

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. 




44 comments:

  1. Oh, the ARROGANCE. Practically without exception.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We are the arrogant ones. How dare we question the authorities on the hill who are paragons of virtue?!

      Delete
  2. They will be waiting until eternity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Like minds think alike and it is most obvious with the fools on the hill. They think that repeating a lie will eventually make people believe they're telling the truth. LIARS!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately I have met a number of people who believe Fr. Gofigan and Msgr. Benavente are guilty of wrongdoing just because they have been accused. If they are open to listening I try to inform them of the truth.

      Delete
    2. I, too, have met people that believe Fr. Paul and Msgr. James are wrong for what they allegedly did. I shake my head at the thought of these people not getting the facts or unwilling to look into the circumstances dealing with the two.

      It's almost the same thing every election year when voters are reminded of the misdirection our elected leaders have done in the past and just re-elect the same problem over again.

      Is it ignorance on the part of the people who refuse to see the truth?

      Delete
    3. That is why we need to really have them come to the village meetings put on by CCOG or get Tim's documents.

      Delete
    4. It's because of the AAA is the one who accused them...No trial needed. Guilty until not proven and even then still guilty.







      Delete
    5. Many people believe him because they trust the church to always tell the truth. That is why I am praying that the archbishop is just mentally ill. Because if he's not then it is a willful abuse of the authority of a sacred office, and since "to whom much is given much is expected", the bishop will be held to a higher account than any of us. If he is not mentally incapacitated then his soul is in very grave danger.

      Delete
    6. Some people are so dense that they won't recognize truth even if it smacks them on the face. For some it is disturbing to think that the Catholic Church, entrusted with saving and bringing souls to Jesus Christ, is capable of deceit and corruption.
      Knowing that the church has paid out at least a billion dollars to victims of abuse disgusts me. Knowing that the Vatican bank is complicit to money laundering disgusts me. Knowing that there is a special place in hell for the unfaithful clerics brings me some solace.

      Delete
    7. As a non-NCW person who has been treated with great kindness from the archbishop I prefer to believe he has been completely brainwashed by the NCW leadership and, thus, does not have full responsibility for his actions. Cults initially suck people in by meeting their deepest inner needs and after that people are hooked and become distorted and can't escape. I believe this is what happened with the archbishop. He was very, very unhappy and the NCW made him very happy. It became his "salvation" and now he can't live without this "drug."

      Delete
  4. Da'con Claros, go sell your story elsewhere. Your nose is growing longer with each lie. Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  5. These guys are full of Balony! Why the heck do we have 2 seminaries then? The stupidest thing I have ever heard. deacon Larry get a clue

    ReplyDelete
  6. Deacon Claros also states the following in the Umatuna in the Q&A part of his article: "Expenses for the seminarians who are sent to Guam from other dioceses to study here are covered by their own dioceses."

    I'll believe that if I could see financial statements confirming the above! While we're at it, what "expenses" do their dioceses pay? If their dioceses paid for their expenses, why would they need money from the Archdiocesan Annual Appeal?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Heard a conversation between store clerk and RMS seminarian. 'So where are you from? Samoa. So how do you like Guam? Not very much. Do you like the Seminary? It's OK." Inspiring. Hope Samoa is paying.

      Delete
    2. Richard NochefrancaMarch 16, 2015 at 8:36 AM

      If their dioceses are paying the tuition. Why are they being imcardonated by AAA.....does not MOe sense.....lies and deceit from the leadership to the poor people of Guam. Take your RMS seminary to another place where people are not easily fooled...... we are fed up with your BS.

      Delete
    3. It is not just the concerned Catholic of Guam that are concerned about having to foot the bill for seminarians who are sent to Guam, the concerned Catholics of Boston are a little upset also. Especially since St. John's seminary has had to help bail out the Archdiocese of Boston after sexual abuse settlements. According to the Archdiocese of Boston's website, "The Seminary paid an agreed upon amount of housing expenditures for students belonging to the Redemptoris Mater religious group, as well as clergy renumeration and related benefits for Redemptoris Mater order priests. Those expenditures incurred by the Seminary were $235,000 and $217,622 for the years ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively." (the seminary is St. John's)


      https://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/neocatechumenate-questions/
      http://www.bostoncatholic.org/uploadedFiles/StJohnsSeminaryAuditedFinancialStatements063012.pdf

      The cost of tuition seems small though, compared to the life long commitment to support the incardinated priests. Can only hope they are excardinated when they leave Guam.

      Delete
    4. R Yanger I am grateful to you and the other obviously concerned Catholics on and off island who take time to intelligently think, question and research information relevant to what is happening to church related matters here. Also gratitude goes to the great scholars and people with humor who also grace these pages.

      The awesome and varied collection of knowledge being shared from many different perspectives is so appreciated. It certainly helps keep our heads above the water while being doused with limitless news of bizarre behavior, the unquestionable documentation that proves an infinite amount of untruths come from our church leaders. Added to that are the reactionary, ridiculous, misinformed, comments. It is not an easy task to bear through some days. We have shared values that run deep for our spiritual life and those of our children, friends, family and the many others we do not know. Grateful for the opportunity to question and be informed. Thanks Tim.

      Delete
  7. Thank you Larry now you count on us to make sure that ccog doesn't try to take our poor archbishop to court...... NOT

    ReplyDelete
  8. In March 2, 2014 Umatuna, "Archdiocese Annual Appeal", it stated that there are 39 seminarinaians,29 for Guam (almost all from off island ), 3 for Samoa Apia,4 for American Samoa,1 for Dallas, 2 for Kiribati. I understand there are now more than 39 there now (2015). However most of the RMS seminarians are from other countries and will be "for" Guam...we will be paying for these people forever.

    CCOG is asking for transparency and accountability of our money....Please don't give to the Appeal until this is provided in detail...not cleaver wording. It is unfortunately that the Deacon thinks we do not deserve the real truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At this point it is highly doubtful that any report from them is accurate and truthful. It's like expecting a pathological liar to tell the truth.

      Delete
  9. From now on, these families have a single mission: to speak about God in their new homelands. They will do this in countries where God has been forgotten or never arrived. .....is Guam a place where God has been forgotten? Just a question.

    ReplyDelete
  10. How can I access the Umatuna online?

    ReplyDelete
  11. God has blessed Guam in many different and wonderful ways. However, I don't believe the NCW is part of Guam's blessings from Him. They are here because life is good and there are meeelions to be made if their cult play their cards right.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The dangers this will cause to those who truly do not understand the magnitude of what is going on. My heart aches and weeps sorrowfully for our church.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Clarification on the seminary. There is a difference between seminarians from other countries which have been sent here by their own dioceses to attend RMS and will return to be incardinated in their dioceses, and those seminarians from other countries who are here at the invitation of Archbishop Apuron and who will be incardinated for this diocese.

    We are footing the bill for those who will be incardinated here, regardless of where they come from. Seminarians who will be incardinated in other dioceses should be having their bills paid by those dioceses. Emphasis on "should".

    The majority of those attending RMS are seminarians from other countries who are invited here by Apuron and who will be incardinated here, for better or worse. And so far, as all can see, it has been for the worse.

    Also, I have heard that some of the seminarians from the other islands came here with the understanding that RMS was actually a diocesan seminary and have realized that it is not. Some are asking to be transferred to JP2 but are being denied.

    I believe the CCOG should write a letter to the bishops of the different dioceses whose seminarians are at RMS and advise them of what we only recently found: RMS is NOT a seminary which trains men for life as a parish priest, but only according "to the life and practice of the neocatechumenal way" which is, at its root, antithetical to parish life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. touche number two for today, Tim. Letter to respective Bishops is in order.

      Delete
  14. Deacon Claros, No amount of justification will convince the faithful to contribute to the AAA drive. We now know that these donations are to be used for the formation of NCW clergy. When will the Archbishop, Kiko and others get the message that we will not contribute to the support and operation of the RMS Seminary. The majority of Catholic laity want to maintain Diocesan and Franciscan clergy.
    I am sure that the Archbishop is aware of the dramatic decrease in Sunday collections; this is the people’s only effective, but painful way of sending a message to the Archbishop. We are frustrated and truly sorry that we have to resort to this type of action. However, not standing strong in our opposition would mean the proliferation by the Neo clergy in all our parishes.
    Deacon Claros, you have not provided a running tally on the contributions collected from the various parishes as has been done in the past. Does this indicate a lack of support from the Catholic Laity?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Do they even have a copy of the article of incorporation? Or they think it is just a piece of paper. It is clear "according to the life and practice of the neocatechumenal way". What is it in there they don't understand? I guess even a person with ESL understand that clearly. Can you bring a copy of the article so we can all have a copy and for those who hasn't been visited yet by AAA, they can show it to him when he mentions again that we have two diocesan seminaries on Guam. They have gotten away with this lie so conveniently.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Deacon Claros, the people from Sinajana had so much respect for you and with all the lies and the cover ups your involved in, no one even acknowledges you, not even the manamkos. Shame.... Pedro Santos

    ReplyDelete
  17. Deacon Claros, the people from Sinajana had so much respect for you and with all the lies and the cover ups your involved in, no one even acknowledges you, not even the manamkos. Shame.... Pedro Santos

    ReplyDelete
  18. This Diocese is not obligated to support the RMS neo seminary. Why we do is beyond me. All these writings lead me to believe that the hierarchy of the neo thinks that the lay people of Guam are stupid! Go try your crap somewhere else, and take claros with you.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Interesting article on Deacon Tenorio and his wife. Seems he takes all the credit for feeding the homeless. Be truthful Deacon, aren't there people or families who cater and also cook for the homeless on a monthly bases. Give credit where credit is due. Just another ploy for the Appeal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I loved serving at the Kusinan Karidad until I realized how pompous Deacon Tenorio was. He treats the volunteers rudely and even makes the "clients" cower into submission when he walks pass them. So condescending. Every evening meal is cooked off site by some family, church or organization. There is no cooking done there except for making rice. What kind of kitchen is this? Dear AAA's photo is prominently placed on the wall when entering. This entity of non profit is raking in monies and tangible goods.

      Delete
    2. For over 20 years from a distance I watched Tenorio enriching himself from the charity of others. Not a nice man Infact evil like the one he serves. I hope he makes peace with God before his end.

      Delete
  20. I used to have great respect for Deacon Larry Claros. Now, I will just refer to him as D'acon Claros, associate of the D'aconmaster, Apuron. And because of D'acon Claros, I now view all Deacons with suspicion.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Interesting dilemma. Larry soldiers for the NCW, as I'm sure many others do, because they have been lead to believe that whatever problem they were experiencing before walking was "fixed" entirely by their choice to walk. They are made to feel that the choice to walk was paramount and had they not chosen to walk, no amount of prayer or faith would have helped.

    Ironically, when people like Larry soldier for Apuron, we instinctively rebuke and invoke the US versus them mentality. If we accept their message, they win. If we don't, it only strengthens their dependence on their communities and the NCW. Again, they win.

    We cannot restore this Church without first eradicating this cancer. To do this, every single parish needs to establish its own separate reserved fund separate and apart from that of the archdiocese. Then every parish needs to work toward an absolute zero funding level for any and all archdiocesan accounts. It will not work any other way. Rome sits on its hands because there is no perceived imminent crisis in Guam. We must bring the archdiocese to the brink of financial collapse first. Then bring the reserved funds to the table under strict conditions. There are no guarantees what will happen then, but our only other option is to continue the status quo and watch our family, friends, neighbors, and co-workers fall one soul at a time into this neo trap. Make no mistake, this neo machine is purpose-built with the singular objective of manipulating the weak. Even the most vigilant among us cannot be our brother's keeper all of the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only problem with this plan is when an NCW Presbyter is in charge of the parish, Fires or disbands the Parish Council and has total control of the finances of that parish. These guys have this all planned out, and if AAA has his way, unless the parishes petition him to prevent the NCW from taking over that parish, The neocats will move in and with an Neocat presbyter at the helms, his only goal is to institute the NCW agenda. Ai Adai, What to do???

      Delete
    2. Yes, but the fund would be under the control of a private board who would be elected by the non-profit members. So even a neo presybter with a neo finance council would have no say over the private fund. For future safeguards, I would have the board adopt really restrictive rules. For example, any disbursement to a single entity exceeding XX dollars within XX days must have unanimous board approval and either be requested by or concurred with by the pastor. If the pastor is a known member or supporter of the neo, then the board must seek alternative concurrence from another ordained priest not affiliated with the neo. This type of thing can go on and on to the point of crippling the non-profit. But for me the key is to have at least enough safeguards with regards to size and frequency of expenses and reporting so that there's no way for the fund to be hijacked without individual members becoming aware.

      On the other point. Apuron only thinks the archdioces is his personal empire and that he can do whatever he wants. Without the support of the local church community, he doesn't have the resources to sustain and I highly doubt Kiko is going to give Apuron money to keep the church whole. Seems like there's a built-in check valve in Kiko's bank account. Money can only flow one way - in!

      Delete
  22. Anon 9:53

    Your recommendation sounds like a plan. Do you have any suggestions on the legal entity that can fulfill the objective? If you recommend a plan that can be implemented by other parishes, I think a lot of people will participate. The challenge facing a lot of us is that we are not lawyers and have no idea on how to implement such a plan. Please share if you have an idea of the vehicle that we can use.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure, others on this blog have suggested setting up private non-profit organizations for each parish. This would entail registering a non-profit entity, electing a board of directors, adopting articles of organization, etc. I'm no attorney but the concept seems simple enough - you setup a tax exempt organization NOT under the control of the archdioces and have parishioners make their donations to the non-profit instead of placing their limosna in the collection basket. You have a board that adopts rules that restrict how those funds can be spent and members of the non-profit who elect the board.

      But again, this must be paired with zero collections and the non-profits must be steadfast in refraining from disbursing any funds until such time as there is an opportunity to negotiate the conditions. Why? Because as long as there is a way for the parish to keeps its doors open and lights on, there is no reason for the NCW to go away. If the non-profit decides to pay the power bill and the water bill directly, then all this means is that 100% of any regular collections can be re-directed to the archdioces. If there are zero collections but the non-profit still pays the bills, then there is no net benefit to this cause. Sure, the archdioces gains no income, but it gets to retain the parish asset "for free" and there is no disincentive for the NCW to leave. However, if the non-profit continues to collect and grow its account while letting the parish essentially fail. One of two things will have to occur. Either the NCW will have to cough up the funding or Apuron will have to close the parish.

      What message will Rome get if all of the sudden a bunch of parishes in rapid succession come to the brink of closure? What message will Rome get if all of the sudden the archdioces starts defaulting on debts owed? What message will Rome get when all of the parish non-profits throw their bank statements on the table with unanimous board resolutions that show they have the financial capacity and support of their parishioners to disburse those funds to instantaneously satisfy outstanding debts - provided the NCW's permission to operate on Guam is revoked. Apuron probably wouldn't do it, but even he has a superior whose authority trumps his.

      Sure this basically boils down to financial terrorism, but the inaction of Rome leaves us no options. I don't want to NOT donate to my parish, but if doing so indirectly supports the mission of the NCW, then I won't. I won't because I am Catholic and I don't want to wake up a year from now only to realize that there aren't anymore Catholic churches on Guam and that I in some way aided in the alienation of my own parish to some random con artist from Spain, his wanna be mafioso Jersey boy, and their Maltese tentago'.

      If our parish can't get together to establish a non-profit, then my plan in the interim is to set aside a separate personal account. If others in my own family want to join, I might change over to some sort of trust account - just because I don't want to be the fiduciary for other people's money. And if the parish ever does open a non-profit, we can always elect to donate it at that time.

      Delete
  23. What giving to AAA (Archdiocesan Annual Appeal, Archbishop Anthony Apuron, same, same) means:
    1. You accept Fr. Paul's removal as parish priest of SBCC even tho the reason for the removal is so flimsy it is so obvious it is not the real reason.
    2. You accept the accusation they made to Msgr James even if they don't have the guts to serve him this accusation formally. You accept it as decent, inserting the accusation in the U Matuna.
    3. You believe that we are still the owner of RMS. Yes in paper but not in actuality. He gave the use of the RMS to the NCW in perpetuity.
    4. You believe that the museum should not be opened.
    5. You believe that Fr. Wadeson was unjustly booted out of Guam even tho it was AAA who booted him out of Guam.
    6. You don't care if AAA continues to lie and lie and lie. Imagine not even bothered when he blamed Msgr James for the closing of museum 4 days after he removed him for the Cathedral.
    There's more but if these six alone are not enough, then give and give and give.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘
      Well-done, plain and simple!

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch