Thursday, September 3, 2015

REPLY TO CAROL ANN

As predicted, Apuron's so-called letter on Marriage Equality was sent by his supporters to different Catholic media sites including one called ChurchMilitant.TV

The Catholic laity are so hungry for real leadership in their Catholic clergy, especially bishops, that it is understandable that the appearance of Apuron actually acting like a moral leader would be attractive. Of course, we on Guam know better, but not so these poor souls who don't.

I posted a couple of notes to help visitors to the site understand that they were being lied to and used and then had a couple of personal exchanges with someone named Carol Ann. 

I am copying her latest message to me below because she has questions that need to be answered for many - even if we have already answered them countless times on this blog. Let us proceed. First, here's Carol Ann's complete comment:

Carol Ann

There are two intriguing points: If the bishop didn’t write the letter, who did write those very accurate words? That individual is very intelligent, brave in his delineation and wise in his summation of the problem and its solution. He has obviously, by those very words, made the Bishop the target of some very powerful forces in the world nowadays.
Secondly, unrelated to the letter, but also highly intriguing, is statement that this Bishop gave away a $40 million dollar piece of property to “Neocatechumenal Way in violation of Canon Law”. Please direct to the Canon Law referred to. A Bishop is responsible for the sale of properties in a diocese - interesting point to learn. Some Bishops are controlling vast real estate tracts that have wildly appreciated in value due to world-wide preplanned and meticulously orchestrated hyperinflation. Purpose for the “give away” of that land? What part of the Catholic Church organization is Neocatechumenal Way? Is the property still retained, under ownership rights, as Catholic Church property? Is that the group formed for Christian Formation of Adults - received approval of the Holy See in 2008? (Presentation by group identified as Neocatechumenal Way to Pope Francis at one of his group Audiences - utube over an hour long in Spanish)

CAROL ANN: There are two intriguing points: If the bishop didn’t write the letter, who did write those very accurate words? That individual is very intelligent, brave in his delineation and wise in his summation of the problem and its solution. He has obviously, by those very words, made the Bishop the target of some very powerful forces in the world nowadays.

Dear Carol,

If the person was very brave then he would have put his own name to what he wrote and not the archbishop's. As for being "wise in his summation of the problem," one would have to be stupid not to see the problem. 

And solution? Does he provide a solution? You don't know this but this bishop's diocese has the highest divorce rate in the world.* In fact, just google the words "Guam" and "Divorce". We come up under the words "divorce mill." 

Had the writer of this letter been truly interested in a solution maybe he should have proposed a ministry to the suffering marriages on Guam. He didn't because that was not his aim. His aim was simply to prop up this bishop who is under investigation from Rome

But more so, the writer of this letter has no interest in proposing a solution to our divorce problem because he, like the archbishop, believes that the Church you and I belong to must go away and be replaced by the Neocatechumenal Way. But more on that later. 

I happen to know who wrote the letter because he contacted me for my input on it. In fact, he has written several letters for the archbishop on this issue. Recently I confronted him about his ghost writing and he admitted to doing it but said that the archbishop was very "humble" and asked for his help. LOL. If there is one person who knows better, it is me. And I don't have time to explain why.

We on Guam scoff at these letters because we know that this bishop doesn't even compose his own sermons. He can't even post an original Gospel message in his weekly paper. He copies them from a book published in the Philippines called 365 Days with the Lord

We probably wouldn't care that he does this except for the fact that he wants to be seen and treated like he's a king. Meanwhile, he hurts and abuses people left and right. He has done this for thirty years. And recently, when he falsely accused and publicly maligned two of his own priests, sheerly for the purposes of advancing the Neocatechumenal Way, the public exploded in retaliation. And what has been kept quiet for 30 and even 40 years (since he was ordained) is now coming out. And it is EXTREMELY UGLY. 

CAROL ANN: Secondly, unrelated to the letter, but also highly intriguing, is statement that this Bishop gave away a $40 million dollar piece of property to “Neocatechumenal Way in violation of Canon Law”. Please direct to the Canon Law referred to. A Bishop is responsible for the sale of properties in a diocese - interesting point to learn. Some Bishops are controlling vast real estate tracts that have wildly appreciated in value due to world-wide preplanned and meticulously orchestrated hyperinflation. 

Dear Carol,

Perhaps you may want to actually do a little research on your own next time. Canon Law is online and it would behoove Catholics like yourself to actually look things up. But I will help you.

The relevant canons can be found under CONTRACTS AND ESPECIALLY ALIENATION (Cann. 1290 - 1298), and specifically Can. 1292:

Can. 1292 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 638, §3, when the value of the goods whose alienation is proposed falls within the minimum and maximum amounts to be defined by the conference of bishops for its own region, the competent authority is determined by the statutes of juridic persons if they are not subject to the diocesan bishop; otherwise, the competent authority is the diocesan bishop with the consent of the finance council, the college of consultors, and those concerned. The diocesan bishop himself also needs their consent to alienate the goods of the diocese.

§2. The permission of the Holy See is also required for the valid alienation of goods whose value exceeds the maximum amount, goods given to the Church by vow, or goods precious for artistic or historical reasons.

Carol, the "conference of bishops" to which the Archdiocese of Agana belongs is the Episcopal Conference of the Pacific. In 2011, at the time the subject property was alienated, the "maximum amount" was set at One Million dollars. Alienation of goods over this amount - as per the above canon required the "consent" of both the finance council and the college of consultors as well as "The permission of the Holy See" - meaning the pope.

Though the archdiocese essentially was given the property, the property - a former hotel - cost 45 million to develop and was valued by the archdiocesan legal counsel in 2011 to be worth at least 75 million. 

In 2011, the archbishop, himself a member of the Neocatechumenal Way, wanted to deed the property at no charge to the Redemptoris Mater Seminary which occupied the property. Because the seminary did NOT belong to the archdiocese - it being a separate corporation - both the finance council and the legal counsel warned the bishop that by deeding the property to the seminary he would alienate the property from the patrimony of the archdiocese and violate canon law. Read more about this here. More can be found here and here

At first the archbishop accepted their decision NOT to deed the property to RMS. Then clandestinely, 2 months later, signed the deed and recorded it with the local government, giving the property to the control of RMS "for perpetual use" - that means FOREVER. No one even knew that he had done this until it was discovered four years later in January of this year. 

Because this was just one of many injustices by this bishop perpetrated on the people of his diocese, a local organization was formed to call the bishop to account. They hired a local attorney to provide a Legal Opinion on the status of the property. If you want you can read it here and a summary of the whole issue here. As per Guam law, the property NO LONGER belongs to the Archdiocese of Agana. 

Essentially this is an Ecclesiastical Crime if not also a civil one and the people of Guam intend to pursue both canonical and civil recourse against this bishop. 

CAROL ANN: Purpose for the “give away” of that land? What part of the Catholic Church organization is Neocatechumenal Way? Is the property still retained, under ownership rights, as Catholic Church property? Is that the group formed for Christian Formation of Adults - received approval of the Holy See in 2008? (Presentation by group identified as Neocatechumenal Way to Pope Francis at one of his group Audiences - utube over an hour long in Spanish)

Dear Carol,

Yes, the purpose for the "give away". This is the most intriguing part and we can't expect you - not living here - to fully appreciate the massive scandal. This bishop is controlled by others. In particular he is controlled by his own chancellor who is in cahoots with the "responsible team for the United States" for the Neocatechumenal Way. This "responsible team" was written into the RMS corporate docs as the "Board of Guarantors" and this board reserves all the decision making power of the corporation to itself. This is illegal as Guam law requires corporate decision to be reserved to the Board of Directors, but that's another thing that will have to go to court. 

Apuron was ordered by the Neo power brokers (Giuseppe Gennarini and Pius Sammut) to sign the property over to the control of RMS so that it could be controlled by the "responsible team" of the Neocatechumenal Way. This was necessary because Apuron must retire soon and these guys wanted to ensure that they had leverage to manipulate the next bishop who might not be friendly to the NCW. 

And to your inquiry about the NCW being approved. This is a myth. The NCW was NOT "approved." Its "statute", after years of correction was "approved." This means that the NCW only has license to operate within the church so long as it conforms to its statute. However, as we on Guam have seen for twenty years, the NCW has no desire to conform to anything. It is its own religion. It uses the church for cover and its founder is skilled at buying influence in Rome. This is the same corruption that drove Benedict from office and which your Michael Voris has made a career of criticizing. 

This cult is Arianism reborn, but Arianism with a purpose: Kiko, the founder sees himself as the great reconciler between Judaism and Christianity. But the great stumbling block between the two is that one believes Jesus is God and the other doesn't. Kiko solves this by teaching that Jesus was not God. Arianism. He doesn't teach this explicitly because he would be caught and lose his support in Rome. Like everything else he shows one face to Rome and another to his cult. 

For evidence of this see Kiko's Trouble with the Trinity by Chuck White. Chuck presents hard evidence in 8 exhibits wherein he exposes Kiko's heresy. Chuck also references the recording of a class, conducted by a neocatechumenal priest, wherein diaconate candidates are instructed that Jesus "was a sinner" and "experienced the forgiveness of the father." To listen to it and read a full transcription go here.

All of this is happening on Guam under the auspices and encouragement of this bishop who is a full-fledged follower of Kiko Arguello. 

COURAGE???

But now let's return to your first point: the so called "courage" of this letter. As an FYI, the letter is aimed at local legislation. There were two bills passed in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, which advanced both gender theory and the legal recognition of same-sex marriage. 

So where was this "courage" when it would have actually mattered. The letter (I have a copy of the original) was released on August 19 AFTER both bills had already been voted on and passed the legislature on August 12. This bishop is not shy about publicly opposing legislation. He is famous for using his churches, his pulpits, and every resource of the church when it comes to any initiative which supports legalized gambling. He shows up at public hearings and makes sure his face is seen.

But he was COMPLETELY ABSENT when these two bills were first proposed. Not a word was said when it might have mattered. Nor, even when the letter was published did he have the courage to call out the senators who advanced the legislation! So what the hell good is this "courage?" 

The whole letter was written so that it could be posted on websites like the one you are commenting on and to garner the slavish adulation that this bishop CAN NEVER GET in his own diocese because the people in this diocese KNOW WHO THIS MAN REALLY IS.

#####

* Guam has the highest divorce rate in the world (4.7 divorces per 1000 population, 2010 Guam Statistical Yearbook vs Russia 4.5 per 1000, 2011 United Nations Demographic Yearbook)

By the way, here are a few other fun facts about this bishop's diocese:


  • Guam has the most liberal abortion laws in the nation which allow for the termination of nearly one out of ten pregnancies with more than 60% being Chamorro. (2012 Guam Medical Records)
  • Guam has the 14th highest suicide rate in the world and a rate 1.2 times the national average (2011 World Health Organization and A Profile of Suicide on Guam, September 2011)
  • Guam has a 20% higher out of wedlock birth rate (60%) compared to the rest of the nation (40.8%, CDC 2010) Note: Guam stopped reporting “illegitimate” births in 2005. 60% is based on the average between 2000 and 2005).
  • Guam has double the teen birthrate compared to the rest of the nation (Guam PDN, 6/25/13)
  • Guam’s rape rate is 94.4 per 100,000 (2011 Yearbook: 151 reported rapes). This is nearly triple the national average of 29.8. (U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012, Table 314)
  • AND WORST OF ALL: Guam abuses and neglects its children at nearly double the national average (Guam child maltreatment rate of 76.81 per 1000 children based on 2012 CPS report and 2010 census vs 41.2 per 1000 children national average as per Table 3-2, Child Maltreatment 2011, Children’s Bureau, U.S. DPHHS)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Recommendations by JungleWatch