Thursday, April 28, 2016


Before we get into this news, I want to recount my conversation with one of the women who was at the demonstration this past Tuesday at RMS.

At about 8am the demonstrators gathered outside the gate of RMS in Yona along the street holding signs protesting the presence of Giuseppe Gennarini, etc. One of the demonstrators suggested that since the Archbishop continues to declare that the seminary property still belongs to the archdiocese that there was no reason they should not be allowed to enter the property. So they did.

As they approached the door of the office at about 8:20am, a woman identified as Helene came out and told them to leave and if that they did not do so she would call the police. The group told her to go ahead and that they had a right to be on the property. The woman continued to threaten them and then called the police.

When the police arrived about 8:35 they advised the group that they had gotten a call from the seminary about the group trespassing on PRIVATE PROPERTY. One of the women present advised the officer that they were Catholics and had a right to be on the property. She further advised the officer that only Archbishop Apuron had the authority to remove them and that if he came out they would listen to him. As the officer approached the door of the office, she advised him that he should ask to speak only to the archbishop since, as the owner, only he had the authority to expel them.

About 15 minutes later, the officer came out of the office and advised the group that they had to leave. The group asked the officer on "whose orders?" And the officer replied "the director, Pius." And then, either the officer or the woman who called the police said "the lawyer told us," meaning the lawyer told Pius and/or Helene to tell the group to get off the property. When one of the women there asked who was the lawyer the answer was "Attorney Terlaje."*

*Today's PDN news story states the following: “The cops went inside and then they came out and told the ladies, ‘The rector and the attorney for the archdiocese said for the ladies to leave,’” Lou Klitzkie said.

While Attorney Ed Terlaje was once the legal counsel for the Archbishop of Agana, the only Terlaje visible and at least pretending to represent the Archbishop recently is the "trained lawyer," Jacqueline T. Terlaje.

Upon learning of this, Bob Klitzkie, a lawyer himself, a real one, decided to write the "trained lawyer" a letter.

Klitzkie talks about schism over seminary

Posted: Apr 27, 2016 4:49 PMUpdated: Apr 27, 2016 4:49 PM

An outspoken critic of the archbishop says Tuesday's removal of Catholic protesters from the Redemtoris Mater Seminary in Yona is more proof that the property no longer belongs to the local church. Bob Klitzkie maintains that the facility is now owned by the Neocatachemunal Way, a group he and others are opposed to.
Klitzkie calls it bizarre that the seminary rector Father Pius Sammut asked police to remove a group of fellow Catholics from the seminary grounds. He is calling on Attorney Jackie Terlaje, who he believes represents the archbishop, to explain why. He told KUAM News, "I think we would agree that a Catholic could go anywhere on the property of the archdiocese and if the seminary is the property of the archdiocese then it would seem to follow that those people could go on that property. They have maintained however that it is property of the archdiocese, I maintain that it is not, that its property of the Redemptoris Mater Corporation."
Klitzkie has long argued that Archbishop Anthony Apuron signed away ownership to the Neocathachemunal Way, a group Klitzkie and other local Catholics believe exerts too much influence over the archbishop. Attorney Terlaje, a supporter of the archbishop, has previously shown title documents that she says clearly show the archbishop remains the owner.  But Klitzkie questions the validity of Apuron's ownership.
And he also says the eviction shows the seminary's true colors, noting, "It suggests to me that Father Pius thinks that it is not archdiocese property that its property of that corporation and that he can have police remove people, excuse me not people, he can have Catholics removed from that property."
Klitzkie says the group just wanted to meet with the archbishop, and  should have been free to visit if it were indeed archdiocesan premises. Now he wants to know why they were told to leave. 
Here is Mr. Klitzkie's letter to the "trained lawyer." 

Robert Klitzkie, Esq.
22 Baki Ct., Yigo, GU 96929
 (671) 653-6607

April 27, 2016

Jackie Terlaje, Esq.

Re: Catholics on RMS Seminary and Archdiocesan property and last night’s TV news

Learnéd Counsel:

Per last night’s TV news, when several Catholics visited the RMS Seminary the police were called. It was explained to a police officer that the Catholics wished to speak with Archbishop Apuron. According to a report, the police officer conferred with people inside the Seminary then stated that Father Pius had instructed the policeman that the Catholics should be ordered to leave the premises of the Seminary.

It is somewhat bizarre that the Rector of the Seminary gives an order for the removal of peaceful Catholics from a location that solicits support from all island Catholics and holds itself out as an institution of higher learning. If you are counsel for the Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary, a Non-Profit Corporation, please be so kind as to provide such adopted rules as are extant which prohibit Catholics from visiting Corporation property. If you are not counsel for the Corporation then by-means-of a copy of this letter I make the same request to the Rector, Father Pius Sammut.

As an alternative, I make the same request to you as counsel for Archbishop of Agaña, Anthony S. Apuron, Incumbent (Archbishop.) Because of the statements of the Archbishop’s agents, i.e. the Vicar General and the Chancellor, he is estopped to deny that the Seminary is under his control. If you are not the Archbishop’s lawyer then by-means-of a copy hereof I make the same request of him. (Along the same lines, please use your good offices to inform which Archdiocesan properties, if any,  are off-limits to local Catholics.}

The news reports showed that the Catholics at the Seminary wanted a conversation with the Archbishop. But when they made that request they were ordered off the property.  The implication here is that Catholics can only speak to the Archbishop when he is NOT on Church property. Again, please use your good offices to inform as to where and how Catholics can be accommodated by the Archbishop.

Absent your prompt response transmitting such rules, might I not be free to assume that the rules requested above simply do not exist? This being the case it would seem that I am free to peaceably visit such Archdiocesan and Seminary premises as I might find agreeable to my comings and goings as a local Catholic.


Robert Klitzkie

cc: Archbishop Anthony Apuron, Rector Fr. Pius Sammut 

The fact is that Pius and the Trained Lawyer were RIGHT in calling the police on the group and have them evicted for TRESPASSING. They were right in doing so because the group was in fact TRESPASSING. They were in fact TRESPASSING because they were on private property which they had no right to be on. And they had no right to be on that property because it is in fact PRIVATE PROPERTY, the PRIVATE PROPERTY of RMS, Inc. Yet, the same "trained lawyer" was in front of the Tumon Bay Rotarly last week lying to all those present that the property does not belong to RMS but still to the archdiocese. LOL, Jackie. Walk into this!


  1. That's a trained lawyer for you. Didn't see that coming a mile

  2. So what is it, Jackie?????? Does the property still belong to the archdiocese or is it a private property? OOOOooooo, this is gonna be good!!! You give lawyers, of good standing, a really bad rap.

  3. So - as Raymond asks - Is it, or is it not church property? It's opportune to say it belongs to the archdiocese, in order to appease and deceive the Catholic Faithful; but it is not opportune to say so (rather say that it is private property - RMS) so Pius can impose on the Police (and encumber public funds) to evict "trespassing Catholic protesters".

    I'm waiting for some learned biblical scholar to quote Christ's words: "You hypocrites! Show me the coin!" - i.e. show me the title of the land!

    But wait! There's a problem there!! Which title should we show? The original one that shows the archdiocese as owner when the former Accion Hotel was first bought; or the one that has a Deed of Restriction on it, deeding the property away; or the amended one that does not show the Deed of Restriction (issued in error according to Land Management); or the "corrected one", the one that is negotiated behind closed doors and "fixed" administratively, not via court order as required by law (that does show the Deed of Restriction, but alleges that it still belongs to the archdiocese.

    Wow! Are we in a jam! What do we do now? Board of Consultors - help!! We should have listened to the original Terlaje Legal Counsel (Ed) who warned in 2011 that any tampering of the title would create a cloud of ownership in the future. Remember him, Gieuseppi? You raked him through the coals for his position, and our brave leader (Apuron) didn't a word in Terlaje's defense. Remember? It's all coming back, right? That's why my April 23 op-ed in the PDN started off with "In my analysis, the advancement of the Neo-Catechumenal Way’s (NCW) agenda and the enthronement of its cultic religion on the Catholics of Guam is at the center of all this hoopla." How prophetic he was!

    OK, ostriches - start looking for the deepest hole in the ground to bury your heads! Or like the Hogan's Heroes Sgt Schultz would say .... "Oooh! I do nothing; I hear nothing; I see nothing." Or better this one -- "Not my fault; the Devil made me do it! God loves me anyway - just the way I am!" (jrsa: 4/28/16)