Tuesday, June 21, 2016

A KIKO COMPARES LUIS CAMACHO TO FR. PAUL

I don't know what we would do without the likes of The Diana and her ilk. Thanks to them, we are able to keep all these issues alive and re-present them over and over for the world to see. Thank you Diana. Thank you, Kiko's. It is you who have driven all these issues to where they are...and soon, even into the courts. Keep at it.  Here's the latest:



Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "NOTE TO BISHOP CAMILLO BALLIN, DOHA, QATAR: INVOIC...": 


Was he not already expelled from the catholic community on Guam? Should he not be forgiven his sins should he have asked for it? Should he continually be expelled until he is no longer a part of the catholic community? If Apuron's actions against the dededo parishioner and Father Paul was uncalled for, then why are you doing the same to this man? Should you not show him the mercy that you wanted shown to Father Paul and that man? 



My notes: 

First, this post was not directed at Luis Camacho, but to the claims of Bishop Camillo Ballin. The fact that you insert Luis into this permits us to once again draw all of this out for the whole world to see. Thank you for the opportunity. 

"Was he not already expelled from the catholic community on Guam?"

No. In fact, that's the problem. All we know is that he immediately disappeared. If he was expelled, then only your beloved Anthony S. Apuron could have done so. All we know at this point is that he disappeared and showed up in Qatar a year later, with Ballin claiming to be his bishop. In order for this to be true, Luis would have had to have first been excardinated from this diocese. If he was, there was no Aviso saying so. In fact, not only is there no Aviso saying so, our cancerous chancellor has recently informed us that the investigation into Luis is still ongoing! This would mean that Luis is still a priest of this diocese. So somebody is lying. Who do you think it is?

"Should he not be forgiven his sins should he have asked for it? Should he continually be expelled until he is no longer a part of the catholic community?"

Fr. Luis was arrested on March 17, 2015. Four days later I publicly called for mercy to be shown him. In fact, I was the only one to do so. Apuron only threw him under the bus. On March 21, I issued this post, suggesting the reasons Luis Camacho himself may have been an Apuron victim of another sort. I invited him to simply be honest with us and assured him of an outpouring of compassion if he did. Here is the last part of what I wrote:
Right now, because of your silence, you are a part of that rot. That's why there is such outrage on this blog. But if you come forward like a man. If you stand up and take personal responsibility for what you did. If you express your deep regret and ask for forgiveness. You will see an outpouring of compassion and support, not because you are a priest, but because you are a man, a human being, a fellow child of God.  But if you let the Archbishop hide you behind his "canonical investigation" and Deacon Claros' whitewashing of the incident "for sure, for sure", then you will go down with them - forever. You have a chance, Fr. Luis. It is not too late...yet.
How sad that Luis did not take my advice. Not only would he not be in Qatar and continually reviled, he would have been celebrated and welcomed. He would have become a true model of humility and an encouragement to all of us who have fallen, privately and publicly. Instead, to save face, Apuron hid him. In hindsight, now that we know of Apuron's dark past, we can see why Apuron immediately got rid of Wadeson, and then Luis. He had to appear intolerant of sexual abuse, particularly of minors. 

"If Apuron's actions against the dededo parishioner and Father Paul was uncalled for, then why are you doing the same to this man? Should you not show him the mercy that you wanted shown to Father Paul and that man?"

Father Paul was not caught by the police with his head in a place it shouldn't have been. Luis was. While civilly no action was taken against Luis because the minor was of the legal age of "consent," not only does the Church NOT recognize an "age of consent" for minors, Luis was an ordained priest of the Archdiocese of Agana, and his actions with the minor girl are of grave concern to our Church regardless of their civil nature. That Apuron scuttled Luis away, only telling us that the investigation is still ongoing and only after he shows up in social media in Qatar more than a year later, is itself a matter of grave concern. 

Fr. Paul, on the other hand, was accused of disobeying a "direct order" to terminate an employee. Fr. Paul produced documented evidence that he had obeyed the "direct order" two years previously, immediately after receiving it. Upon producing the evidence of his obedience, Apuron's charge was de facto annulled. However, Apuron changed the charge and still ousted Fr. Paul, showing that it was not the initial charge at all that was the issue, but simply a desire to get rid of Fr. Paul. 

As for the parishioner, and in contrast to Luis, he went to prison for 20 years, was released on parole, worked as a volunteer at Santa Barbara parish for three years as a condition of his parole with Apuron's consent and long before Fr. Paul became the pastor, and was reconciled to his faith by Father Paul after meeting him several years later. 

And you dare to compare the two? Thank you once again for permitting us to expose to the world the "kiko-think" of the Neocatechumenal Way. 

Recommendations by JungleWatch