Monday, February 1, 2016


The above picture shows a sign with the name "Wolchek." The correct spelling is "Wojciech" and the full name is "Rev. Fr. Wojciech Jaskowiak." 

Fr. Wojciech was not incardinated in our archdiocese. The story is he was on loan from the Newark, New Jersey archdiocese to help establish RMS. 

Though Fr. Wojciech was sent here to assist RMS (or so we were told), he ended up pastoring the parishes of Merizo and Umatac, which is probably why people have been wondering where he went.

Placing Fr. Wojciech into a parish, particularly in the position of pastor, gave the impression that he was either incardinated here or was working as a "guest" priest - as do several of our priests from the Philippines. 

It was natural, when he suddenly disappeared, that many in our archdiocese wondered where he went, believing him to be one of ours - thus we see his name on the sign along with the other "missing" presbyters. 

The story is that Fr. Wojciech was recalled to the archdiocese of Newark by his bishop. We have no reason to doubt that. However, his sudden disappearance without an official good-bye or thank you in the U Matuna or anywhere else, especially after his several years of service to our archdiocese, is odd. 

And even if there is nothing fishy about his sudden disappearance, this is another example of Apuron's careless disregard for his own people. Another case of "now you see them, now you don't" - something that has become all too common with his NCW "presbyters." 

According to the website for Saint Peter's Church in Belleview, New Jersey, Fr. Wojciech appears to be fully ensconced as parochial vicar of a parish pastored by another priest who spent a few years here on Guam, Fr. Ivan Sciberras, a former vice-rector of RMS. 

There is also another RMS "now you see him now you don't" priest at this same parish, Father Giovanni Rizzo, who is listed as "in residence."  

While I had a good relationship with all three priests for most of the time they were here, things "went south" with Rizzo after I confronted him about his rewrite of the paragrpah 1182 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Rizzo rewrote the paragraph in order to justify the placement of the neo-table in the middle of the church. 

Paragraph 1182 reads:

"...the altar, which is the center of the church, the sacrifice of the Cross is made present under sacramental signs."

However, Rizzo, writing for a special edition of the PDN which featured RMS, wrote:

"...the Altar—that is at the same time the Cross, the place of sacrifice, the Lord’s table and the empty tomb of the risen Christ—is in the center of the Church [1182]."

As you can see, Rizzo added the word "in," and anyone who knows the Neocatechumenal Way, knows why he added "in," since Kiko insists on placing his "table" "in" the physical center of their "eucharist." I can't say "church" because Kiko does not believe in celebrating his "eucharist" in a "church." 

The fact that a priest, the vice-rector of a seminary, and a canon lawyer on top of that, could feel at liberty to change the official teaching of the Catholic Church, angered me and I confronted Rizzo about it. But I first confronted Archbishop Apuron. 

As usual, Apuron did not respond, and I was only able to confront Rizzo in the lobby of the Hyatt during the 2010 RMS gala. 

Rizzo's defense was that he did not say that he was quoting the Catechism. I could hardly keep in my disgust at Rizzo's pathetic and insulting excuse. 

At the end of his published alteration of the Catechism, Rizzo added the bracketed number: [1182]. This is a reference to the exact paragraph in the Catechism. 

So while he did not actually write "the Catechism of the Catholic Church says....," his use of the paragraph number is unquestionably a reference to the Catechism and is an outright attempt to mislead. 

In short, it was a lie. A big one. And he made it bigger by lying even more to me personally, and of course to everyone in the Archdiocese of Agana. 

This willingness of the priests in the Neocatechumenal Way to lie to us has become common place, but in 2010, when this happened, I had my first glimpse of it. 

You can read the whole account here


  1. We do not want any of these presbyters back at all. Yet if we are to spend for the education of these riff-raffs we need a guarantee of return for our investment. For example, ncw has to pay back the Catholic Church of Guam (us, not the disgraceful neo presbyter bishop) for every year that these presbyters stay in that seminary. There really is no value-added presence of these foreign riff-raffs who merely use Guam as a springboard to legitimize their papers, and make inroads into the US parishes. We are in a way complicit to the watering down of the already besieged US Catholic Church when we allow these half-baked and kaka-zombies to invade and infect trusting American churches with their agenda. Immigration and Naturalization must know the true nature of the deceit they are unwittingly reeled into by the lying archbishop of Guam. This process started by apuron is a form of human trafficking because the foreign young men are brainwashed into being in kiko's service for the rest of their lives.

    1. So many stories about Father Wojciech...first it's, he went back to Poland because his mother is very ill. Second story is, he was called back because he was not pushing the NCW with the parishioners. Thirdly he was sent on mission to Maui. The story goes on. He is now in NJ. Why was he called back, only he knows.

      He was one presbyter whose homily made sense and sometimes made people laugh. He is very different from the rest.


Recommendations by JungleWatch