Saturday, June 4, 2016

POPE OKS PROCEDURES TO REMOVE BISHOPS WHO BOTCH ABUSE CASES

Posted by Chuck White
More hope!
Washington Post, June 4, 2016
By Nicole Winfield | AP


VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis has established legal procedures to remove bishops who botch handling sex abuse cases, saying they can be kicked out of office if the Vatican finds they were negligent in doing their jobs.  Read more.




39 comments:

  1. The Holy Father issued the new rules today in a Motu Proprio entitled, "Come una madre amorevole", or "As a Loving Mother".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a time for everything and everything is in God's time.

      Delete
  2. answered prayer .. but the faithful of Guam still need to be vigilant ...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hope springs eternal.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would think that filing a law suit against the accusers or their advocates would certainly be considered "botching" the handling of such cases.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The most ironic thing about Apuron if he does indeed file a lawsuit is that it opens the door for another lawsuit that may have never been filled if not for his. What I mean is that lets say Mr. Quintanilla and Mes. Concepcion never intend to file a lawsuit, which is very possible. However once Apuron files his complaint against them they have to file a response as per the civil rules of procedure. It is very common for a defendant in a civil case to then file a counterclaim. Meaning this: The archbishop files a complaint in court against Mr. Quintanilla. He has to respond to the complaint and admit or deny the allegations listed. What most likely will happen is the attorney for Mr. Quintanilla files the response AND a counterclaim to the initial complaint. And thats how this usually happens. The archbishop is sealing his own fate by filing a lawsuit in this matter. I certainly hope his big fancy law firm in the states warns him about this. Also that big fancy law firm can't represent him in court here since they are not admitted into practice on Guam. This should be very interesting.

      Delete
    2. A US law firm was never contacted. This is another propaganda used to keep us from further inquiries....

      Delete
    3. Ditto anon at 7.40....
      plus if firm there was, it would have to be able to exercise their trade in Guam.....
      A little like the "Denver Law Firm" who wrote an opinion on RMS property in Yona, but refused to publish it....LOL

      Delete
  5. Well, if they do sue, then it's a win since all this garbage will come out. If they don't sue, the Archbishop and his crew become so ineffectual that someone will have to do something.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What will Francis do once he is forced to remove most of the world's bishops?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. Appoint bishops who are actually accountable, I'm thinking.

      Delete
  7. "The bishop himself doesn’t need to be morally guilty. It’s enough if he is purely lacking in the diligence required of his office.

    The procedures call for the Vatican to start an investigation when “serious evidence” is provided that a bishop was negligent. The bishop can defend himself. At the end of the investigation, the Vatican can prepare a decree removing the bishop or ask him to resign. If he doesn’t, the Vatican can issue a removal decree."

    I'd say brother tony is all of the above. Anyone else agree?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are correct, and the evidence on Apuron have been piling up in certain offices not held by Neos in the Vatican for at least 2 years. Despite their clout and intricate web of corruption within the Curia, they shall not be able to sweep this case under the rug, anymore.

      That being said, it does not mean that we should relax our efforts, or slack in our resolve. I am sure more victims will certainly show up, now than the cat is out of the bag.

      We will need to support and shield these survivors and give them a real Catholic welcome in our parishes (what is left of them).

      Delete
  8. This could be the beginning of an "arduous and painful" end to the archbishop's reign. Reign of terror.

    ReplyDelete
  9. - And Your Point Joelle at 11:30 PM? If Most of the World's Catholic Bishops are Guilty, then is it not time to Clean House don't you think? DAH! There is No Common Sense in this world today!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the point may be exactly as made. Almost all the ills of the church can be traced to the bishops. There is something very wrong with the process of how they are selected. Maybe we should go back to the practice of the early Church where the people elected the bishop.

      Delete
    2. Perhaps, but electoral process requires informed electorate, and we see what a bang-up job we've had with our senators. It's worse in the Mainland.

      That said, you can only be elected if you don't want the job, i.e. you can't run for it. As Plato would say, the rightful ruler should be the wisest and therefore is too wise to desire to rule.

      Delete
  10. The evil queen gets dethroned. The populace rejoices. Happy ever after.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Let us continue to pray fervently that His Holiness will remove our NCW-Cult shepherd, who indeed is lacking in diligence.

    “Lack of diligence” defines the past 30 years.

    Prayers have power. Thy will be done!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anna Maria I. DelgadoJune 5, 2016 at 12:18 PM

      Amen!

      Delete
    2. Anna Maria I. DelgadoJune 5, 2016 at 12:28 PM

      Come to the perpetual adoration chapel at Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament Church in Agana Heights. It's located in the back of the church. It's the perfect place to pray for reparation to our Lord's Church in Guam. It's also a beautiful place of refuge from all the noise of daily life.

      Delete
    3. Reparation! Indeed.

      Delete
  12. Conclusion of the Washington Post article:

    Even before the new procedures were announced, two U.S. bishops who bungled abuse cases resigned on their own: Bishop Robert Finn in Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missouri, and Archbishop John Nienstedt in St. Paul and Minneapolis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. Resigned on their own. They were smart. Apuron is not.

      Delete
    2. Maybe former bishops Finn and Nienstedt weren't NCW and following someone else's orders.

      Delete
    3. Yes anon at 6.41, they were not neos. In fact Nienstedt was considered quite conservative, and honest.

      His problem was the people he surrounded himself with, were way too political, not very worried about the victims, and in fact not very good administrators.
      This led to a cascade of defections (and revelations) at the chancery in St Paul, and the perspective of losing an historical trial.

      Finally, the Archbishop felt that the buck stopped at his desk, and resigned.

      As a footnote, during this whole mess, the Archbishop himself was accused of improperly touching a young boy at the Cathedral. His reaction was quite different than Apuron. He immediately alerted the Sexual abuse coordinator, who alerted the Police.
      He then took a temporary leave of absence during the inquiry.
      The Archdiocese reached out to the family of the allege victim.
      The case was quickly solved to the Archbishop advantage, since the police was able to prove the parents had used the chain of scandal to try to make some money by coaching their son on what to say. This ended to be the only instance, in this MN case where the allege victim lied to the authorities, in all other 120 plus cases, allegations were proven right.
      As you see a far cry from our "bishop".

      Delete
  13. May is the month of the rosary.."Come una madre amorevole" Si Yuós Ma'ase, Santa Marian Kamalen!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Pope Francis, in Deacon Steve Martinez's case:

    According to Maybe/May/the Diana-the assumed assistant of the Archbishop Anthony Apuron.
    DianaJune 4, 2016 at 11:01 PM
    Dear Anonymous at 10:51 pm,
    The Financial Officer must work together with the Archbishop. If the Financial Officer neglects his duty, it reflects not only on the Archbishop but on the entire diocese. Everyone must do their part in building up the Church. And if the Financial Officer neglects his duty by not submitting in the financial report to the Archbishop, that is the fault of the Financial Officer and he should be fired.
    ------------------
    So sorry Deacon Steve Martinez! You ain't a "Neocat".
    -------------------
    DianaJune 4, 2016 at 11:21 PM
    Dear Anonymous at 2:13 pm,
    The "Neocats" are not the ones giving the Archbishop a problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keep May talking. I have a surprise for her. LOL.

      Delete
  15. It's not over folks! We still need more info and encourage those who were abused to speak up. Need someone to work what might have happened in Mangilao.

    ReplyDelete
  16. DianaJune 4, 2016 at 11:21 PM - Dear Anonymous at 2:13 pm - So Diana/May - When did you come to the conclusion that the "Neocats" are not the ones giving Brother Tony a problem? Did it just dawned on you? Maybe one day in the future you will find out that Brother Tony Gave Himself The Problem or should I say Problems! WoW - Common Sense is Really Dead!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well anon at 7.36, in a twisted way, and taken at the first degree, May is almost right.

      Indeed the "neocats" are aiding and abetting the Archbishop, but, and there is a big BUT (Pun intended May)not in a positive way.

      They are helping in the coverup, the lies, the twisting of truth and the encouragement of non Catholic practices.

      So you see anon, in May's twisted little mind, the neocats are not a problem for the Archbishop. Of course that is because she is too blind, too deaf, and mostly too stupid to grab at the concept, that a great part of the Archbishop's problems are tightly linked to the neocats.

      The other theory would of course be that she is not blind, deaf and stupid, but rather a liar and hypocrite.

      You chose your poison.

      Delete
    2. Hey, Putrid, I hope there is a confessor on deck. Your Titanic is listing badly.

      Delete
  17. Why does apuron have to go off-island to find legal representation? Answer: No lawyer worth his or her salt on island is willing to take on such a losing case. For not only will the lawyer lose the case, he/she will also lose future business on island as he/she will be forever associated with apuron.

    Notice that even Jackie the trainee lawyer is not good enough for apuron; or is she smart enough to also not take apuron the loser's case? Are there no REAL lawyers who may be in the NCW willing to come to apuron's defense?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe Diana-May-Mae can be his new lawyer since she or he has an answer for everything under the sun. Oh the irony........lol.

      Delete
    2. Hey Anonymous June 5, 2016 at 8:52 AM

      This "off-island to find legal representation" is just a smoke screen, and mean while back at the ranch...
      jt "the trained", is in a back room closed door meeting, speaking with the ass AG, to work out some deal, u know, "back door" stuff...

      Delete
  18. u.Tony, here's another chance for you. Sue Pope Francis? Somebody wanna put a timer on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Actually, all they need is a Guam attorney who can associate as local counsel.

    Lawyers from the off-island firm can get admitted pro hac vice for the particular court case and do most of the heavy lifting.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have to say: a few people on island have heard these stories for a long time, but it's still amazing to me that most people aren't terribly surprised that AAA is accused. We simply don't put it past him. It's just too bad it took such an evil thing to bring the overall corruption to light instead of blind deference to the most greedy in the Church.

    Such as it is. Perhaps not the means for purification we've prayed for, but it's a good means nonetheless. God is good.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch