Wednesday, April 15, 2015

SNAP RESPONDS

Guam’s Wadeson reinstated

Posted by Joelle Casteix on April 14, 2015 in Clergy Abuse CrisisGuam | Subscribe
- See more at: http://theworthyadversary.com/3434-guams-wadeson-reinstated#sthash.Y0jrGaYa.dpuf

KUAM announced today that former LA priest John Wadeson has been reinstated in the Archdiocese of Agana (Guam).
I have written about Wadeson in the past. According to the Los Angeles Archdiocese, he was twice accused of sexually abusing children and had been banned from working as a priest there.
According to a statement published in The Tidings (the Archdiocese of LA Newspaper), the LA Archdiocese did a investigation and “concluded that there is no reason to preclude Father Wadeson from serving in priestly ministry.”
This decision was based on the fact there has never been a settlement paid on an abuse case against Wadeson. According to the statement, when the allegations first arose, the Society of the Divine Word (the order to which Wadeson belonged) investigated the claims and found them “unverified.”
Here are my issues:
  • According to the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and every other diocese across the US, the payment of a settlement does NOT equate implied guilt on the behalf of the accused. If this were the case, former San Diego Bishop Robert Brom would have been removed years ago. (He paid a former seminarian a confidential $250,000 settlement for allegedly coercing the victim into sex)
  • Why didn’t Wadeson do something immediately when the LA Archdiocese published reports that he was twice accused? If in the same position, I would do everything in my power to clear my name immediately. And I would be public about it to ensure that I was adhering to transparency.
  • What does “unverified” mean? That there was only one victim? There were no witnesses? What is a “verified” allegation?
And probably the most troublesome:
The Archdiocese of Los Angeles has concluded that there is no reason to preclude Father Wadeson from serving in priestly ministry showing that all the rumors and alleged calumnies against him were unfounded.
Rumors and calumnies? It was not a rumor that LA had said he was twice-accused, nor was it a rumor that they had banned him. But by making such a bile-infused statement, Apuron is attempting to silence and shame victims and whistleblowers by labeling them sinners and rumor-mongers.
As I have reiterated numerous times, the clergy sex abuse scandal is not about abuse. It’s about cover-up and how bishops handle allegations of abuse, perpetrators and victims.
Whether or not Wadeson is guilty, the most troubling aspect of this case is how Apuron has used it to silence victims, divide the faithful, bully whistleblowers, and shelter secrets.

13 comments:

  1. "It was never Archbishop Apuron's job to demand an investigation or even to conduct one because the allegations took place in California. His job is also not to fight for the rights of the priests." DIANA, whoever the hell you are, This is the most ridiculous thing you have EVER come out with. I hope The Archbishop is happy with your journalistic skill in explaining his "victory". He should also throw you under the proverbial bus. Astonishing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, and apparently it is not Apuron's job to check the backgrounds of any of the neo-hordes he imports.

      Delete
    2. Can anyone explain exactly WHAT APURON'S job IS??? MORATORIUM ON ORDINATIONS!!!!

      Delete
    3. Dingbat Diana is right because she/he/it said so. Almost anything you want to know just ask her or him or it. Only thing she/he/it won't reveal are her identities. Diana is a total whack job!!

      Delete
    4. Don't forget, Fr. Pius sanctions and promotes "Diana's" blog. Since he is the head catechist on Guam and all activity goes through him, I hold him responsible for the dribble that is on there. They can't deny his stamp of approval because it would be a flat out lie.

      Delete
  2. excellent analysis by snap. "rumors" and "calumnies" are two favorite words used by whomever writes for the arch. because we all know he doesn't crank out his own BS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very Capable of BS. But not this level of BS. As a matter of fact, no personal BS notes, no personal BS homilies, not enough time to crank out any of his own BS jut now. Mental Illness.

      Delete
  3. so in Camacho's case, if the victim does not "verify" that it occurred, does it then make it rumors and calumnies? oh what a tangled web we weave . . . .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 3:57 p.m. Presumably the police can verify something sexual occurred. Hopefully, the police will respond to Tim's FOIA request so we know once and for all if the police personally witnessed (Fr.) Luis Camacho performing oral sex on the 17 year old girl in the car on the beach.

      Delete
  4. So what? Is he granted priestly faculties in LA? If there are "no verified allegations" why would they deny his priestly faculties in LA. come on...
    So continue to expose our children to potential harm as long as they are ncw- it's okay??? Get a grip AAA and Adrian.
    As clergy you are to avoid all situations that may cause scandal, innocent or not...
    You are throwing your people to the wolves, and you will be held accountable! This is how you plan to reconcile the Diocese??? good luck...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Apuron better not even think of bringing Wadeson back to guam!

    ReplyDelete
  6. So quick to reinstate an accused neo presbyter who has yet to declare his innocence. So quick to spirit away a neo presbyter caught red-handed by police in flagrante delicto. So quick to publicly castigate a non-neo rector for unsubstantiated financial mismanagement. So quick to judge a non-neo pastor for showing kindness to a reformed criminal. Yet so slow to answer questions about his own actions that are far more heinous and malicious than those he judges. Questionable leadership beyond belief that continues to erode credibility of the Roman Catholic Church in Guam. Rome so slow to act in its attempt not to ruffle feathers with powerful lobbyists in the Vatican.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary Lou Garcia-PeredaApril 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM

      Anonymous (April 18, 2015 at 6:54 AM), you are spot on in describing the double standard practiced by AAA — NCW presbyters definitely receive preferential treatment while Non-NCW Priests are treated so terribly.

      You are also correct in your observation that Rome is slow to act. That is why it is so important for you and the countless other who post as Anonymous to participate in the Motorcade and Prayer Rally scheduled for Sunday 3 May 2015. You can continue to be one of many anonymous faces in the crowd but please come and show Rome your concern for their non-action as well as your support for the healing of our broken Church in Guam. Please bring your family and friends who share your concern about the sad state of our divided Church in Guam.

      God bless you!

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch