Friday, June 19, 2015


Listen to it here:

Read it here:

or here:


  1. ARCHBISHOP KREBS....CARDINALS FILONI & PAROLIN please read this transcript and see for yourselves what we have to deal with on a constant basis. Even if you kow tow to the NCW put yourselves in our places. Would YOU spiritually thrive under an archbishop who talks to his people like this??????????????

  2. Meetings with the arch are lessons in futility. Our only hope is for him to resign but since he claims the Pope likes the job he's doing that won't happen. What use will he be to Kiko when he is no longer arch? None at all. We are on a parallel path with the arch and we will never intersect. Sad but true.
    Eileen Benavente-Blas

  3. Eileen – Your observation (as I see it) is right on target! As I have always contended from Day 1, the Root Problem of our fiasco in the archdiocese is found in the establishment, growth and influence of the NCW within our “community”. Cut the root, and the tree will wither and die, and will not bear fruits. We will have rid ourselves of the problem.
    The Core Problem is the Archbishop who, instead of depriving the Root of its ability to grow, nurtures and promotes its growth. The very Core of the expansion and growth of the NCW in our midst lies with our archbishop who has so aligned himself with NCW (unholy alliance) that not only does he NOT oppose it on behalf of the “99% regular Catholics” (words spoken at the Toto meeting), he promotes and defends it because he is “one of them”. Thus, we’re s… out of luck. We are on the wrong side of his fence!
    Notwithstanding our desire to do so, we cannot just oust the NCW out of our archdiocese – as they have some juridical right to exist (their Statutes, approved by Rome). Behold the Takamatsu (Japan) experience. They wanted to kick the NCW out of the Japan diocese. Rome responds: “You have someone that can do that! Your bishop! Solve your own problem!” It’s a win-win situation for Rome. It doesn’t get its hands dirty; it appears that Rome is on Japan's side when the NCW leaves, or behaves! In our case, we can’t do that because our supposed “savior” is “Judas himself” who had “sold this archdiocese” to the NCW. Blatant example: the RMS property!
    If we had an Ordinary who has the guts to tell the NCW “Look, fellas! If you want to exist in my turf, you gotta do these – and lay down the ground rules like Father Paul did. And NCW cannot bulk because that demand is within the bishop’s right (as it was within Father Paul’s right).
    Will Apuron do this? NO! He has so entrenched himself with the NCW that he cannot extricate himself. I think they’ve got him by…… Pointed question posed: “Are you beholden to any other authority other than the Pope in running the affairs of this archdiocese?” and the skirted answer was “Not really... I do listen to the charism and if the charism works, that fine…” (1:14:46 seq.) He might just as well have said: “Yes; Kiko, Carmen, Genarinis, and Pius”.
    So you see, there was not an iota of bending. The parallel path continues. And as in a parallelogram, the two lines will never meet if they continue in their given paths. That was why – to Deacon Tony Leon Guerrrero’s conciliatory suggestion for co-existence with the Neos, I responded “Never can happen unless they comply with the teachings, theology, and liturgy of the One, Holy, Roman, Catholic and Apostolic Church” – unless we want to compromise our Faith!
    Suggested antidote – Arch: Reject (sever) your fealty to the NCW; repent of your errors; repair the harm that you had done; return to your true calling to be a shepherd to the “99%”; rejoice in your return to the Fold, much like the return of the Prodigal Son. And if you can’t/won’t do these – step aside (resign) and let someone else do the job! – jrsa (6.20.15)

  4. Well said, Joe R San Agustin. To Kiko, Carmen Genarinis, Pius and Tony start palnning your exit for nothing will stop us, Concerned Catholics, until we exterminate your effort from growing any more your corrupted cult and damages you have done to our church.

    1. ERRATUM: Co-existence is the wrong word, phrase. Yes; we certainly can co-exist. What I meant was we cannot become the same church, so long as they do not adhere to the theology, liturgy, and practice of the Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church. We can co-exist (I stand corrected), but we cannot become the same church - just like we co-exist with other religions: Baptists, Adventists, Jehovas, etc. But we cannot be the same Catholic Church, unless they conform to the Catholic Church teachings, Faith, etc. - jrsa.

  5. Janet B - MangilaoJune 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM

    Very interesting that Tony admits that Fr Luis is in the Holy Land. If all he did was pick up a girl at school why spend a year in luxury "repenting" at the Dumbest Galilliae-ay-ay-ay? If all he did was merely pick her up with consent why is he repenting and considering his vocation? If there is already a hearing sometime next year did the court give permission for Fr Luis to leave this jurisdiction?

    Gee whiz, Tony boy. Your answer sure raises a lot of questions. Is there more you're not telling us? In the true spirit of transparency you gave us every little detail of the supposed details of wrong doing for Fr Paul and James.

    Of course later on we found out that most if not all the "facts" you fed us about those cases were outright lies. But in the same spirit of transparency aren't we also entitled to hear every lurid detail of what your crack pot investigator found out about Fr Luis.

    Please do tell. A fascinated world awaits every detail highlighted in the Neo-Tuna rag and posted on your web site. Maybe an insert would be in order. Oh, and for good measure, don't forget the usual press release to all the media just like with Fr Paul and James.

    Just one little caution.........
    don't preach it in your read homilies as we believe it may offend the weak and the youthful.

    We await.........

  6. Good questions Jant. I have two more:

    Q: What the difference between a registered sex offender and a sex offender?
    A: The registered sex offender is a lay person who paid for his crime and served his sentence and was deemed safe by the justice system professionals to re-enter society, but is fired from his voluntary job at the Catholic Church because it makes the church look bad.
    The sex offender is a priest who serves his time in luxury accommodations in Jerusalem and continues to get paid because to do otherwise would make his bishop look bad.
    Oh. Ok now we see the difference.

    Q: What's the difference between the Vatican before the sex abuse scandal nearly ruined the church and the Vatican of today?
    A: the pre-scandal Vatican did nothing thinking they were immune from prosecution and moral judgement.
    The post scandal Vatican does nothing because they cannot admit that their bishops are fallible.
    Oh. Ok. Now I'm scared.

    1. Add this on to your questions, Frankie.
      Q. What's the difference between the lyrics to "Celito Lindo" (Ai, ai, ai, ai - canta y no llores: Ai, ai, ai, ai. Sing; don cry!) and AAA's parody ("Ai, ai, ai, ai - magacha(i) kuchinuho! Ai, ai, ai ai. They caught on to my vileness (evilness)!" - Kuchino na Kapuchino!

  7. Now that my letter-to-the-editor has been published in the PDN, I can submit same to JW. It appeared in today's (June 23) issue:

    If (at last night’s wrap-up parochial visitation meeting at Toto – June 15, 2015) raising my voice louder than usual, and pointing my finger at the Archbishop, to emphasize a point, was indeed (de iure, as opposed to de facto) being disrespectful to him, I apologize to the holder of the position of Archbishop. Here’s how it went.
    Someone in the assembly asked the Archbishop what he (Arch) was doing to bring healing to the church. Archbishop mentioned several things, and then added “We are meeting with CCOG to resolve some issues…”, at which point I said loudly, “Archbishop, that is a lie! You never met with CCOG! Why do you lie to the people, Archbishop – why; why?? Just like you lied to the people at the Agana Heights parochial visitation that it was Msgr James who closed down the Agana Museum; Msgr James had already been booted out when the museum was closed by Msgr David C. Quitugua – for repair.”
    Dead silence for a few seconds - as my message sank in! Deacon Larry Claros later rose in defence and accused me of being disrespectful toward the Archbishop, and that I should know better because I had been a priest. In similar tone, I responded to the deacon: “Larry, you are using a very faulty way of argumentation, called "ad hominem" – if you can’t attack the argument, attack the arguer! This has got nothing to do about me! This has got everything to do with what the Archbishop said. It was not just a falsehood (an un-truth); it was a lie (a falsehood that is stated ‘with the intent to deceive’). How weird (softer: strange; coincidental) that it was a deacon who came in defence of the Archbishop again – just like it was another deacon who came to the Archbishop’s defence and suggested a lie to explain the non-replaying of a damaging radio broadcast – years ago! Is lying a standard-operating-procedure (SOP) for these people?
    Much more can-should be said about last night’s epic meeting, but verbiage limitation prevents me. - JR San Agustin, resident of Toto.