Tuesday, September 20, 2016


What is so sad is the Church leadership's Godless attachment to money, money, money. As Webster points out, our local Church leadership is totally bankrupt. They have reached absolute moral poverty.

In all their exhortations and fear mongering, have you ever heard them say "Let us pray and put this is the hands of God"? No call for prayers or quiet reflection. Just sign the petition or hand the death certificate to FD, for they will surely close.

Sounds like the same logic employed by abortion clinics. A mother has a child in her womb, and tests show that the baby will have downs syndrome. So the doctor advises the mother that to bring the baby into this world will mean great pain and suffering. It will be more compassionate for the poor child, and easier for the mother and family to do the only sensible thing...abort the baby.

It is a faithless decision, and also a decision that neglects the rights of the baby. And that's how I see this current issue in our Church.

To have a baby with a medical abnormality takes great faith. It will be a difficult road, filled with lots of unknowns. But the Church demands that we take that leap of faith, and place it all in God's hands. We do it not because it is right for the family, or society (which may be burdened with the cost of the child). We keep the baby because it is right for the baby, and right by God.

How could our Church throw out the victims of sexual abuse, merely because it has the potential to be tough? How could our spiritual leaders be so devoid of faith? Instead of boldly standing up and saying we will do what is right, no matter the cost, the Church resorts to our lust for money. They make an appeal to our temporal sense, and abandon all moral consideration.

So a question needs to be asked of our Church on Guam and of our faithful -



  1. This has nothing to do with protecting assets. This is all about protecting asses.

    1. Just google Chris Malafunkshun Barnett's version in regards to this whole issue. Perhaps it might persuade you to have a changed heart.

  2. Thank you for your very powerful comments.

  3. Yes, this is the ultimate hypocrisy. When an individual is faced with a tough decision the Church requires us to pray, meditate, and to do what is right by God, and not what we want, or what is easy. As Catholics we have come to accept this teaching. Jesus calls us to pick up our cross and follow him.

    But now that it is the Church, because of it's sorrowful neglect of victims for more than 50 years, the Church Pharisees are telling us to shed the cross, throw it off our shoulders, and make the victims carry it all by themselves.

    Well, in case Hon and Jeff have forgotten, the victims have carried that cross for all these years, and the Church has not lifted a finger to help. Not that they may be required to carry their load, the Church says hell no!

    Forget that civil law is well established on the Church's liability in these cases. Let's just look at the moral aspect. If one victim had a claim, no one would be worried. The Church will pay it, the victim gets on with his life and the Church (maybe) learns a lesson. But now there are many victims. Six allegations against Apurun so far, and probably many more.

    Then there is Fr Tony Cruz who apparently was Apurun's immoral mentor. By what we've heard we can imagine that the scars run deep and wide with that sicko as well. And then there is Fr Louis Brouillard, who admits he abused, but so many he can't keep count.

    But, if they have an obligation as Church, that shouldn't make a difference. The law should be okay as written.

    Is there any sane reason why the Church can say they accept financial responsibility, which they already have, yet they are opposed to institutional liability?

    1. Janet, Your comments are so RIGHT ON! "The Church Pharisees are telling us to shed the cross, throw it off our shoulders and make the victims carry it all by themselves." Oh, and these pharisees push us to sign the petition, enlisting our children to thwart Bill 326-33!

  4. Thank you for your eloquent reminder. YES!!

  5. Powerful sentiments. Faith in God's Providence.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. this is wrong so the archbishop who is named anthony and also apron must also be is and should be in the jail is. Is the rumor is who it as should be is true?

  8. I love apuron he is such a great cook! He also is an artist did not you know?


Recommendations by JungleWatch