Wednesday, November 2, 2016

THE LEARNING CURVE

Posted by Bob

Bishop Michael Byrnes has a tough job ahead dealing with a multitude of problems. Catholics are pulling for him, praying for him and wishing him the best. Of course we can count on the one who over the years created the problem to do his best to spoil the start of Bishop Byrnes' assignment. Count on apuron:


Image result for apuron guam“It is with great joy that I welcome the news of the appointment of Bishop Michael J. Byrnes as coadjutor archbishop of Agana by the  Holy Father. This is a most welcome answer to my requests for help in the governance of the island at this time,” Apuron said in a one-page statement sent Wednesday afternoon by his private attorney, Jacqueline Terlaje. Guam PDN. 

As usual it's all about apuron. Poor Bishop Byrnes starts with the endorsement of probably the least respected person on island..

As with Archbishop Hon, we can expect that there will be a learning process for Bishop Byrnes. 
Image result for learning curve


Some things Bishop Byrnes has said:

According to KUAM news:
Image result for apuron guamWhen asked about the Neocatechumenal Way and his familiarity with the issues here Bishop Byrnes responded “I have some familiarity, not close, I’ve never been part of the Neocatechumenal Way. The reputation is good, you know, in the broad stroke and we are Catholics together… So we should be able to find some way. I know there’s a division and faction and my heart is sad for that, but I know there’s some way… I mean if we believe if Jesus I the Lord then he is the Lord of all us and so we’ll sort this out as Christians”.

...Bishop Byrnes said. He added that he is aware of some of the issues here on Guam, but the first thing he will do when he gets here is meet and listen and hear both sides, “I don’t want to come with any preconceived notions on how I will handle this, until I see the situation for myself and that’s the only way for me to get a grasp of it, “ he told KUAM News.

PNC News
Another issue Byrnes will like have to address is the controversial ownership and leadership within the Neocatechumenal Way and the property in the middle of that controversy: the Redemptoris Mater Seminary. 
At this point, Byrnes says it's too early to form an opinion or to "take sides.""To listen; that’s the first plan. My main expertise is the scripture and the constant direction of the scripture is to listen to both sides before you judge; the limited knowledge. I know right now is there seems to be a taking of sides. I have no predisposition to take a side other than the side of Jesus, honestly," said Byrnes.
Image result for discernment
There aren't two sides, Bishop Byrnes. Catholics (no initial adjective required) don't take liberties with the liturgy, do want priests not presbyters in their parishes, abhor the gratis alienation of the patrimony of the church, will strive to recover the property that was given away, have no tolerance for a bishop who was mean to his priests, abhor child molesters and will go to some lengths to help victims of child molesters seek justice.


Image result for two sides to every story













32 comments:

  1. So far picket signs have been very effective teaching devices.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big hmmmmmmmm. Doubt Apuron wrote this....for some reason. He writes dopey stuff...but this is too dopey even for him. We have some real sick people in our Church.

      Delete
  2. https://www.facebook.com/kuamnews/videos/10154220179683742/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Bob,

    I think you are right--there is only one side, the side of truth. But even a judge and jury have to listen to attorneys from both sides before something like the truth is arrived at. It is the difference between process (of listening) and resulting judgment (for truth). Let's pray that Archbishop Byrnes learns fast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At this moment he has 18 days to determine which "side" will own the Yoña property forever.

      Delete
    2. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)November 3, 2016 at 7:16 AM

      The question for me is which of the bishops makes the decision on the Yona statutes of limitations? Currently, Abp Hon is in office. When does Abp Byrnes' appointment take effect? Immediately upon its announcement last Oct. 31st? If Abp Byrnes' appointment is effective immediately, as coadjutor archbishop of Agaña he is currently "coadjutor" with Abp Hon. Do the two of them discuss the Yona matter and come to a decision? or is it Abp Hon's decision alone to make since he is the current bishop in office on Guam.

      Delete
    3. AB Byrnes cannot not decide. No action before the clock runs defaults to the other "side." No time "...to see for himself the lay-of-the-land before..."

      Delete
    4. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)November 3, 2016 at 11:33 AM

      Here is an excerpt from Abp Hon's statement "...In our case, Archbishop Apuron was relieved of the pastoral governance on June 6, 2016. Thus, Archbishop Byrnes all the more is asked to take charge immediately. As a matter of fact, in this appointment, the Holy Father has expressly granted His Excellency Monsignor Byrnes all the Faculties, Rights, and Obligations of the Archbishop of Agaña, civilly and ecclesiastically, without any exception." Pay attention to the word "immediately." I take that to mean "now." Abp Byrnes doesn't need to be present on Guam to be apprised of this time-sensitive issue. At present, can Abp Hon apprise him of the information provided by the CCOG re Yona property and ask Abp Byrnes to make a decision about litigation rather than have the statutes lapse?

      Delete
    5. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)November 3, 2016 at 1:17 PM

      I support Abp Byrnes’ course of action to getting the lay-of-land of the Archdiocese of Agana in listening and talking and assessing. That course of action will take time, but the conclusion will be close to accurate in the long run. The Yona property issue, because of the statute of limitations, is another matter. In this situation, it calls for Abp Byrnes to be in a crash course mode in assessing that situation. He and his administration will live with the long term consequences of the Yona property, whether those consequences are good or bad. From time to time Tim and others have pointed out that, for the most part, it is the laity that gets the Church issues moving. If Abp Hon has not or does not plan to present this matter to Abp Byrnes in the next day or two, can the laity present it? The best entity among the laity are those who met with Abp Hon and presented him with the chronology and facts of the ownership of the Yona property. They can make the first person representation, which is more compelling (ie “We met with Abp Hon on ____ to present him with the matter relating to the ownership of the real property on which the Redemptoris Mater Seminary is situated. Because of a time sensitive statutes of limitations matter, we wish to bring this matter to your attention in order to provide you with the opportunity to take a course of action that you may deem is best for the archdiocese blah, blah, blah …) The suit can be timely filed for the simple reason of not letting the statute run out. If while the suit is active, other solutions are found by Abp Byrnes to settle this matter, the case can be non-suited. In the doing it this way, the deadline is not blown. If, after presenting him with the materials and Abp Brynes decides not to file the lawsuit, the laity can’t blame itself for inaction. The laity can’t be regretful with a woulda-shoulda-coulda since it would have done did what it could --- even up to the last minute. If “whomever” wishes to send the materials presented to Abp Hon to Abp Byrnes, I make the offer for the materials to be emailed to me and I will assemble them in a nice book and overnight them to Abp Byrnes. Please write a cover letter or I can help draft if you want. Detroit is not in outer space. We can send stuff there overnight. It’s worth a try.

      Delete
    6. "Another issue Byrnes will like have to address is the controversial ownership and leadership within the Neocatechumenal Way and the property in the middle of that controversy: the Redemptoris Mater Seminary."
      At this point, Byrnes says it's too early to form an opinion or to "take sides."

      "...the Neocatechumenal Way. The reputation is good,..."

      There aren't several issues; there's one. To say that there are "two sides" is to ascribe semantic legitimacy to that which is in substance illegitimate.

      "Catholics (no initial adjective required) don't take liberties with the liturgy, do want priests not presbyters in their parishes, abhor the gratis alienation of the patrimony of the church, will strive to recover the property that was given away, have no tolerance for a bishop who was mean to his priests, abhor child molesters and will go to some lengths to help victims of child molesters seek justice." The "other side" negates these concepts and doesn't recognize the hierarchy of the Church. There really aren't two sides for AB Byrnes to consider. Action is required.

      Delete
  4. And What has AB Hon been doing these last few months...observing...give us all a big break, please!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, what has hon been doing these last few months? It seems from Archbishop Byrnes remarks that the RMS problem will be his to handle. So, I guess hon will not do anything about it before the statute of limitations expire.

      Delete
  5. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)November 3, 2016 at 3:54 AM

    Abp. Byrnes is being diplomatic in his responses --- as he ought to be. After all, he is bishop for all Catholics on Guam, including the Neo practitioners. I agree with him that, while he may have heard or read about the various problematic situations of the Catholic Church on Guam, he would have to see for himself the lay-of-the-land before making public pronouncements on any of the problematic issues. To us, all that stuff is old news and we’re at the phase where we desire resolutions. And now! (or better, yesterday!) While his process may be a slow way to understand the local Church situation, it is a fair and practical process. If you will recall, Abp. Hon appeared to have had a position before he took over, only to find out that the situation is not as he had believed or have been led to believe. It was worse! With Abp. Byrnes’ stated plan to listen to all parties, study any evidence and make assessments accordingly, the truth about the Catholic Church on Guam will speak for itself. The truth is very evident to anyone of sound mind. Unfortunately, for decades the Church has been led by Abp. Apuron who really has not been of sound mind and healthy emotion. He could not see the truth in how, under his leadership, he was bringing down the Church. The truth cannot help but rear its beautiful head.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)November 3, 2016 at 4:05 AM

    I am not surprised at all by the tone of Abp Apuron’s “welcome” statement where it is all about him (Apuron) and how it was his brilliant idea in the first place to send another bishop to the island. The style and tone of that statement is written by the same Neo ghost writer(s) who wrote all or most of the NCW public statements that we have heard and/or read (and LOL’d over) in the past. Those folks have never learned how much their public statements/written correspondences have served as fodder to many whenever one is released.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't see the document, did he signed it. Rumor has it Apuron is ill.

      Delete
  7. How much authority and independence will Abp Byrnes have if this archdiocese is still in the congregation headed by Filoni? Are we able to change congregations?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good question.

      Delete
    2. And move back to US bishops conference...US rules per sex abuse would have been more helpful...(although they came LATE to their response)

      Delete
    3. Good question, indeed! Someone (more knowledgeable of the details than I) should expose AAA's role on how the Archdiocese of Agana went from the jurisdiction of the US Conference of Bishops (USCCB), of which Guam was a suffragan, to the Conference of Bishops of the Pacific (CEPAC). I think it had something to do with the NCW bait for AAA to set up a RMS in Guam as that would ("for sure, for sure") get the recognition of Rome and the probability of a red hat (which eventually went instead to a bishop from Tonga - if I remember correctly). The NCW didn't deliver the goods, but got AAA to set NCW cemented in Guam, and got it a $70M+ asset instead! What a mess AAA had done for Guam! Hope Archbishop Coadjutor Byrnes will look into this, and right the wrong done! (jrsa: 11/4/16)

      Delete
    4. Guam's transition to CEPAC had nothing to do w the NCW or Apuron. Flores opposed it. The assignment of Guam to CEPAC is evidence of Rome's stupidity after Vatican 2 which put inculturation over brains. Rome made the determination only on Guam's geographical location and ignored the 400 years of European-American history. Guam has nothing culturally uncommon with the rest of CEPAC.

      Delete
    5. Thanks for the clarification, Tim. If Archbishop Flores had opposed the CEPAC connection from the beginning, my next question would be why didn't AAA follow suit in opposing it? Any personal motive? I'm trying to connect the time frames between our inculturation into CEPAC and the invasion of Guam by the NCW and the establishment of the Guam RMS in Dec 1999. Do you happen to know the dates?

      Thanks for standing up to the truth (as you usually do), and I admire your tenacity and bravery in putting your name "under penalty of perjury" to what you write. Anyone who does that is either so damn sure of his position, or so damn stupid for taking the risk of possibly being wrong. I think you know which side of the line in the sand I stand. - jrsa.

      Delete
    6. Neither Flores or Apuron had any choice in the matter.

      Delete
    7. On March 8, 1984, . . . the diocese was elevated to a metropolitan see, the Archdiocese and Metropolitan Province of Agaña. The metropolitan province consists of the Archdiocese of Agaña and its suffragan Roman Catholic Dioceses of Chalan Kanoa and of the Caroline Islands, and the Roman Catholic Apostolic Prefecture of the Marshall Islands.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Archdiocese_of_Agaña

      So the transfer to CEPAC was part of the process of our elevation to an archdiocese and the establishment of a metropolitan province.

      Delete
  8. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)November 3, 2016 at 8:39 AM

    Here is a link that you can cut-and-paste on your browser from the "Michigan Catholic" (the counterpart of the "Umatuna Si Yu'os" in the Archdiocese of Detroit). It has additional background on Abp Brynes' appointment to Guam. http://www.themichigancatholic.org/2016/10/breaking-pope-francis-appoints-bishop-byrnes-as-coadjutor-archbishop-of-guam-archdiocese/

    ReplyDelete
  9. According to PNC story, AAA had the letter on an official letterhead of the Archdiocese? Isn't he stripped of his powers and anything official from the Archdiocese has to come from AB Hon or Father Jeff????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point anon 11:26 AM. That means Apuron is clearly acting outside his bounds of authority. He has been suspended and thus is acting ilegally when he uses the letterhead. Apuron is totally out of control.

      Delete
    2. Doesn't one of the "sides" center on Apuron?

      Delete
    3. Speaking of Fr. Jeff, where is he? Lately he hasn't been seen at the cathedral (where he has been celebrating many Sunday masses)or as spokesman for AB Hon.

      Delete
  10. i assume hon is the main contact with archbishop byrnes as far as getting him up to speed on the specific issues. that in itself is already a bad thing, since that's the only perspective ("side") he'll be hearing for the next couple of months. if hon's not doing jack about the yoña property, i can only assume he's not advising archbishop byrnes about the approaching time limit either.

    hopefully byrnes also takes time to review hon's actions and inactions since hon arrived. if he turns his back on victims as hon did, or dismisses the picketers as hon did, or gives even the appearance that he believes all is well with the ncw on guam, then he will have a miserable time earning the trust of Catholics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right, Rey d, this is why the "both sides" approach is so wrongheaded. There aren't "two sides" unless you want count right and wrong as sides,

      Delete
  11. It is now down to the wire on the Yona property and the suspense is nerve wracking. Trust the new finance council are fully aware of what they are up against and the options available to try and avert such a tragedy from occurring. BUT should AB Byrnes take immediate action to turn the "clock" back, it will provide the
    time necessary to work towards the return of the seminary and keep the Neos from realizing their grandiose plans for a complete takeover and further expansion.
    Please God, help us all in our hour of need and help us to remain vigilant and to accept your will.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch