Friday, June 12, 2015



  1. Marilu Diaz MartinezJune 12, 2015 at 10:08 AM
    When our local sons -- who do not wish to pursue a vocation in the ncw and therefore seek diocesan seminary formation in the U.S -- are NOT ONLY turned away by this archbishop and are refused financial support, BUT ALSO, AREN’T EVEN GIVEN a letter of recognition and acknowledgment by their archbishop (seeing as, such acknowledgment is required for them to pursue a seminarian formation in the U.S) WHY THEN are we non-neo Catholics, expected to support and give to a fundraiser which ignores our local sons but supports (100%) foreign residents in a religious movement which is not an entity that belongs to our island’s archdiocese and are -- ironically -- in opposition to authentic Catholic Teachings and Beliefs especially with regard to major Catholic Doctrine!

    These local sons who were turned away by the archbishop were willing to assume the cost of their seminary formation in the Mainland, yet this archbishop still refused them a simple letter of support, recognition and acknowledgement. Our local sons want, more than anything, to pursue a religious vocation -- and you denied them that, Archbishop!

    Archbishop, do you see why we have boycotted your appeal and fundraiser? You selectively provide support and give credence only to neo formation and neo ways! This is also why we will continue our financial boycott so long as you refuse to provide us with bonafide financial and program service transparencies! The failure of your appeal is our doing and the doings of your non-neo Catholic congreation, Archbishop -- do not fault our good non-neo Pastors!


  1. Janet B - MangilaoJune 12, 2015 at 11:22 AM

    Marilu - you have stated so simply why the Appeal was a total failure. Thank you for reminding us all how our own shepherd denies the vocations of good men because they refuse to bend a knee to kiko.

    And your beautiful statement is a reminder to all why we should continue to financially boycott this archdiocese until we have a true shepherd for the people, not a shepherd for a cult.

    As they would say in the boys club we are not allowed've hit a home run in your analysis of the problem. As Monsignor David (the Wiser) boldly said back in July 2015 "Archbishop - YOU ARE THE PROBLEM!"

  2. The arch won't accept that he is the problem. His Neo puppet masters think they can make the entire archdiocese Neo. Won't happen, arch. You want our money and we are not giving you any more financial support. If not for Tim and his blog, we'd still be in the dark about your Neo dealings. I cringe when I think how I supported your appeals all those years you were diverting our money exclusively for Neo purposes. No more money, arch.
    Eileen Benavente-Blas

  3. The neo leadership has controlled the Archdiocese because apuron has senselessly sold his leadership to this lecherous organization whose only mission is to promote herr kiko. Anyone who does not "Achtung" the weird neo engineering are dealt with expeditiously. Guam Catholics were unknowingly sold this propaganda without their input, just their trusting nature for leadership. Well, enough is enough, they have wisened sufficiently through the efforts of the social media. Please save up your hard-earned dollars for the future education of our local seminarians. As for these bogus rejects that apuron continues to invite, wine and fly to their enclaves, and force down our throats, no more! They are nothing but dead weights that are placed on our shoulders - think Luis Camacho, Orange Juice Edivaldo, Pretty Arch Driver Harold. So with Deathly Presence David, Pugua Fatty Adrian, and Dumbo Claros.


  4. Living off our $ supported by us.

  5. Melissa Roberto-SanchezJune 13, 2015 at 12:18 PM

    Tony Apuron is a bad guy, pure and simple. He is deceitful and without morals. He is the worst thing to happen to Guam in decades. He is without a soul.

  6. Fr. Matthew BlockleyJune 13, 2015 at 12:40 PM

    When you appoint a bishop with no character or values you end up with the present crisis of leadership the world is now reading about on JW. Self inflicted moral decay that tony inflicted on the people. When he told the people of Guam NCW is best for the future of the church he meant it was best for him. It served no purpose to the church of Guam. He created hell on the island for you guys to live in. This is the real issue here. The spiritual leader led the church into decay.

  7. Jungle Watch: almost two years since notice given to Father Paul and almost a year for Msgr. James. The Carmel in Tamuning was the place of our procession of Prayer when Archbishops were here to listen to us. So our voice would be heard in Rome. If Archbishop is the celebrant on July 16 , the feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel we can attend and outnumber the Neos and seminarians he brings in tow? Let us show our faces and pray with the Carmelites. OurLady protect us.

  8. Shame on you Anthony Apuron, you don't deserve the title of Archbishop! You are a Chamorro and you have failed God and Guam Catholics. May God have mercy on your soul. This island belongs to our Blessed Mother and you have even insulted the mother of God by removing her from some of the island churches and trying to lower her status. You and your neo cult will never succeed. As God has let the devil go to a certain extent, He will never let him win and that is the same as you neo cult. I continue to pray for all of you! Anti-neo Catholics should have our own Charities Appeal to help our island sons pay for their genuine studies of our Catholic faith and pray that by the time they become ordained a priest that this poor excuse of an archbishop will be "OUT!"

    1. The Sablan name is being dragged through the mud by Anthony Sablan Apuron. What a shame.

    2. Sorry about the Sablan name. Doesn't care about family....not Capuchin family, Christian family on Guam. Only his beloveds. You know who. I'm not mentioning them.

    3. Mary Lou Garcia-PeredaJune 14, 2015 at 3:44 PM

      Anonymous (June 13, 2015 at 2:51 PM), your idea for non-NCWs to have our own Charities Appeal to help our island sons pay for their genuine studies of our Catholic faith is admirable. However anyone who wants to study at an off-island diocesan seminary AND return to serve the Archdiocese of Agana must be sponsored by AAA.

      Last year it was revealed in this blog that AAA has refused to sponsor a young man, Aaron Quitugua, who requested to attend an off-island seminary AT NO COST TO THE ARCHDIOCESE. Imagine that — Aaron was willing to cover the cost of his education and formation at an off-island seminary. The only thing he needed to be able to study for the diocesan priesthood and return to serve the Archdiocese of Agana was a document of sponsorship. But on 27 December 2013 Fr. Adrian Cristobal wrote the following to Aaron " I regret to inform you that your request to have the Archdiocese sponsor you at Mt. Angel Seminary is denied"!!!

      There are currently no other options at this time as AAA is determined to force anyone who wishes to study for the diocesan priesthood to receive their "formation" at RMS alongside the would-be presbyters for the NCW.

  9. Who Is the "Archdiocese of Agana" is this the catholic people of Guam? Or Archbishop Apuron himself.

    1. People of God

    2. To my understanding, “archdiocese” (as also “diocese”) is a nomenclature of administrative jurisdiction overseeing parishes. As with a “parish”, what constitutes an “archdiocese” (“diocese”), is the People of God. To my understanding, the archbishop (Apuron, in this case) is not the archdiocese, no more than the pastor is the parish. To my mind, it is the People of God who constitutes them all. The People of God is the parish, is the diocese, is the archdiocese, is the church – not the pastor, not the bishop, not the archbishop. These titles (pastor, bishop, archbishop) do not imply ownership. They imply rather “stewardship”. The actual owner is the People of God.
      To the point that Anon 8:33 is trying to make (I think), Archbishop Apuron is not the archdiocese, no more than Father (Pastor) so-and-so is the parish. For purposes of administration civically, the archbishop is the corporation sole of the archdiocese, acting as the trustee for the trust – which in this case is the people who constitute it. He is NOT the archdiocese, no more than the Governor of Guam is the government of Guam.
      Bottom line, the Catholic people of Guam IS the Archdiocese, not the Archbishop who administers it on our behalf.
      So stand up – Catholic People of Guam – the parish is ours, the archdiocese is ours, the Church is ours – the Church is us.
      This is my own opinion, subject to official interpretation. Thus, I prefer to stay Anonymous. If it helps some, good; if it offends some, sorry!

    3. Your observations are correct. This is why, even as per the civil recognition of the diocese (a corporate sole), the incorporator and sole member is the name of the current bishop followed by the words, Archbishop of Agana, Incumbent.

      And as per the civil constitution of the diocese under the laws of Guam governing a corporate sole, you are also correct that his office is that of a TRUSTEE. Thus the violation of the TRUST by the TRUSTEE is an offense which could incur legal repercussions as well as canonical.

      The alienation of the Yona property removed a significant portion of the patrimony of the diocese and is a clear violation of the TRUST by the TRUSTEE, especially since it was done clandestinely and without any notification or approval of the required bodies.

      Rome can take action against Apuron for doing so to "vindicate the rights of the Church," but more importantly, he may be able to be civilly sued for his violation of the terms of the TRUST.

      The challenge is that few attorneys or courts have much in the way of precedent to turn to in this regard. The People of God don't often civilly sue their so-called shepherds because there simply are very few wolves of Apuron's magnitude among the episcopate. However, we won't let that stop us. We'll give Rome a chance to do something. If they don't, then we will.