Friday, August 5, 2016

PDN: (BROUILLARD) SAYS "IT'S POSSIBLE" HE ABUSED ALTAR BOYS

Former Guam priest says 'it’s possible' he abused altar boys

A former Guam priest who was publicly accused during a Legislature hearing this week as having molested an altar boy in the 1950s said Thursday “it’s possible” he abused altar boys on island and he’s asking for forgiveness from those he may have hurt. CONTINUED

18 comments:

  1. Omg what kind of a priest is this.?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fr. Louis is 95 best he tells us all he did on Guam. Nothing to lose at his age. Telling truth is the best thing he can for Guam.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It seems that this diocese has known for years about the abuses these priests have inflicted upon its victims and yet swiftly covered them up by hiding them from its faithful. I'd say SUE the archdiocese after passing the law before this legislature.

    ReplyDelete
  4. See if Hon signed the past two pension checks for June and July for Brouillard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is Brouillards mental state at 95?

      Delete
  5. Hon, you definitely know that child sexual abuse occurred or is occuring on Guam. Why are you not commenting on the bill lifting the statute of limitation. Child abuse occurs all over the world. My guess is you're trying to protect someone or yourself.

    ReplyDelete

  6. Archbishop Hon should be aware of where all his priests are and what they are doing. Very disturbing he claime to have no awareness of Fr.Louis when it is shown he had full knowlwdge.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Imagine saying " it's possible" i abused. Rot under Apuron's 30 years is beginning to be seen. I knew the smell of his Rot but now its confirmed. This Archdiocese is a cess pit of abuse from Apuron down. Question is how much deeper does it go and how far does it streatch?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Janet B - MangilaoAugust 5, 2016 at 10:23 AM

    Why do Church leaders feel so compelled to lie when asked about sex abuse?

    Vince Pereda points out that one hallmark of a sex abuser is that they refuse to admit their crime, even when in counselling sessions. We certainly see this with Apurun. He will lie about his abuses to his dying day (which I hope is far off so victims can take every penny he has in his vast wealth).

    But Apurun aside, why do most bishops feel like a lie is better than confronting the truth? I doubt that most bishops are sick freaks like Apurun. I doubt that Hon is a sick freak/sex abuser as one poster had stated.

    Here is my theory on why most bishops lie about sex abuse... it scares the heck out of them, and a lie is easier than an admission that a priest has run off the rails. And because there are no immediate consequences to the lie, versus the immediate consequence of admitting the truth, lies will trump the truth for the leadership of the Church.

    Two things must happen in order to change this mentality that lies are the easier path. First, the Pope must make the consequences of the LIE more harsh and dreaded by every bishop in the world. If HON were immediately defrocked for his lie about Brouillard, every bishop in the Catholic world would suddenly get the courage needed to actually tell the truth.

    Holy Father, if you are serious about sex abuse then getting rid of Hon immediately would start the Church down the right path. While the reduction in the ranks of bishops and cardinals would be dramatic, the good news is that our Pope could start to refill those ranks with solid priests, orthodox in their belief, and truly pastoral and giving in attitude, rather than looking out for self enrichment.

    Let us hope that Hon is the first sacrificial lamb to start the cleansing process that is so desperately needed in our global Church. Sadly, this is probably too much to hope for.

    But, as I mentioned above, there are two things that must happen to make the consequences of "the LIE" so great that a bishop will want to actually tell the truth. The SECOND factor is legislative action. This is why what our senators are doing is so very important.

    When laws are passed which hold sex abusive sick freaks like Apurun accountable that is good, because victims can find an avenue to have the truth revealed and receive compensation. But the really important aspect of the Guam law is to also hold employers and institutions responsible. When bishops realize that they are accountable for the actions of their priests, you can bet there will be an attempt to do everything possible to prevent abuse. And if they are truly responsible then the courts will take that into account.

    Rather than telling the "lie", bishops would want to confront the problems head on. We saw the reaction of Hon, which I believe supports this. Hon was absolutely silent to the victims. He offered prayers for Apurun, but snubbed Walter Denton. He hid from the media, not wanting to confront any issues, because he had no answers.

    BUT, as soon as he was served with a lawsuit from David Lujan, he immediately ran to the media with his tail between his legs, trying to all of a sudden make nice to everyone. And even though his efforts are merely a show, and less than truly sincere, we saw a breath of life.

    I predict the same will happen when my two factors are implemented. When Pope Francis immediately cans bishops for not telling the truth of sex abuse, and when courts hold those bishops responsible as well, we will finally start hearing bishops practice what they preach - thou shalt not lie!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We can certainly wonder whether or not the pope is serious. His sending Hon here is an indication that he is not. However, to answer the larger question about lying about sex abuse. The book Good Bye Good Men by Michael Rose details how it was the bishops who grew the homosexual culture in the seminaries through the 60's and 70's and even into the 90's when Pope Benedict finally took action against them - an action which would lead to his being thrown out (which is what really happened).

      I work closely with many people who are gay so it is difficult to say what I am going to say without knowing that this could be offensive to them. What is really happening here is NOT pedophilia. Pedophilia is specifically oriented towards pre-pubescent children. Almost all of the victims save for maybe Joseph Quinata who was 9, had either reached puberty or even adolescence. In other words, they were, biologically, male adults. This fact was born out in the 2002 John Jay College of Criminal Justice Study commissioned by the bishops themselves after all hell broke loose in the late 90's - early 2000's.

      Bishops like to brag that no other organization has done more to combat child abuse in its organization, yet, it has done nothing but attack a straw man: the pedophile. This is why the problem continues. In the name of political correctness and perhaps to not offend the sexual orientation of many bishops, they are content to let the villain be pedophilia. Sort of like our government using the term "war on terror" when it is a war with something they do not want to name.

      Delete
    2. P.S. A certain Mrs. Cruz who testified in favor of the bill on July 28 and who had a long career addressing this behavior, actually used the correct word: hebephile.

      Delete
    3. From the National Catholic Reporter (June 4, 2016)
      ROME: Pope Francis has signed a new universal law for the global Catholic church specifying that a bishop's negligence in response to clergy sexual abuse can lead to his removal from office.
      The law also empowers several Vatican dicasteries to investigate such bishops and initiate processes of removal, subject to final papal approval.

      The move, made by the pontiff in a formal document known as a motu proprio on Saturday, appears to represent a significant moment in the worldwide church's decades-long clergy sexual abuse crisis.

      In case after case in the past, the Vatican and church officials would dig in to protect bishops even when there was substantial documented evidence of negligence on their behalf. Now, the pope has formally mandated that the church's offices in Rome must prosecute bishops who fail in protecting children.

      "Canon law already foresees the possibility of removal from the ecclesial office 'for grave causes,'" Francis states in a short preamble to the new law, given the Italian name Come una madre amorevole ("Like a loving mother.")
      "With the following letter I intend to specify that among those 'grave causes' is included negligence of bishops in the exercise of their office, particularly relative to cases of sexual abuse against minors and vulnerable adults," he continues.

      Law takes effect in September 2016. If Hon doesn't do his job as instructed by the Pope, Hon, along with Apuron, will be on the chopping block.

      Delete
    4. Unfortunately, the Motu Proprio is another master stroke of the "Francis Effect," the right words but no teeth. The document does not even name the "dicasteries" which are supposedly authorized to investigate. It simply refers to "The Congregation," from which we can only surmise that it is The Congregation already authorized to deal with bishops and priest, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the same Congregation which (except for a few years under Benedict) looked the other way at all this and continues to do so now. Francis' only action against bishops appears to be those who have a particularly "traditional" bent and can be tied to some sort of negligence.

      Here's the Motu Proprio: http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2016/06/04/0404/00936.html

      Delete
  9. Good point Tim. The word is hebephile..
    Study his inclinations psychology one sees children were victims yes but the sexual attraction is not children . He acted on them . Real attraction is around 18 to 23.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The former Social Worker who testified at the Hearing is Annabelle Hemsley Cruz. I am not too sure if that is the correct spelling for her maiden name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Her name is Annabelle Hemsing Cruz. Many may also remember her as Annabelle Aguon.

      Delete
  11. NCW followers: Catholics in the middle East face persecution; you don't! Courage,read this. https://cruxnow.com/global-church/2016/08/03/syrian-catholic-leader-challenges-claims-islam-non-violent/

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think it's time that all altar servers be at least 18 years old.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch