Thursday, December 22, 2016


Posted by Tim

As horrific as were his assaults on young boys who served him at the Altar of God, Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron's real crime was accepting the bishopric of the very diocese in which he had perpetrated those horrors, and, some say, continued to do so. 

Actually, the word "accepting" is probably wrong. Those close to the matter know that he "angled" for it, if not blatantly manipulated himself into that position from whence he alone would be the sole arbiter and judge over his horrid history. 

This is why he never permitted the archdiocese's sex abuse policy to be amended. Not only did he keep the policy purposely weak to protect himself, he also kept it weak in order to protect those around him who were party to his dirty secrets if not guilty of some themselves.

"The archbishop has purposely kept his sex abuse policies weak in order to protect himself and those around him,” Deacon Steve Martinez told the press on June 1, 2016. For daring to speak the truth, two days later, Apuron had Deacon Martinez served with an episcopal decree forbidding him from further speaking publicly about the issue. 

On the same day, the Chancellor for Archdiocese of Agana, Fr. Adrian Cristobal, publicly berated Martinez and accused him of "a calumny of such magnitude that the only recourse to the civil and canonical legal process to address these intentional lies." (How serendipitous is it that the "civil and canonical legal process" is now turned on the person Cristobal was defending and may turn soon on Cristobal himself!)

Had it been up to Apuron, this archdiocese never would have had a sex abuse policy. However, as the monstrosities of clergy sex abuse came to light in the late 90's and early 2000's, the pressure was put on all dioceses to do something.

The "something" that our archdiocese did was a placeholder policy which predates the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, published in late 2002 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in order to establish uniform norms to address the crisis.

While the Archdiocese of Agana is not a member of the USCCB, it was critical that the Archdiocese align itself with the USCCB in this matter due to the fact that as a U.S. Territory, Guam falls under the U.S. legal system. 

Apuron made this clear in his letter to clergy on April 24, 2002, wherein he anticipated the actions of the USCCB:

Of course, all of this was just a foil. Apuron never intended to update the policy to USCCB norms because it would expose him and his friends. This was evidenced by the fact that he ignored a letter nine years later from the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples in November of 2011 to amend his policy according to the Vatican's norms established by Pope John Paul II. 

Apuron's refusal to comply with the Vatican's request did not go unnoticed and in February of 2013, he received a strong admonition to amend the diocesan policy from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the highest authority on the matter in the Vatican. 

Apuron knew the danger of amending his policy so he didn't. For more than thirty years he had plotted and schemed to retain absolute control over his past and along the way he had allied himself with the money and power of the neocatechumenal dons in order to insure his survival.  

Had it not been for brave people like Roy Quintanilla, Doris Concepcion, Walter Denton, Roland Sondia and Deacon Steve Martinez, and the army of the faithful who, motivated by the horrors they were hearing, decided to do the only thing they could do - militate for a law that would hold monsters like Apuron accountable and march until the wall of Jericho came tumbling down - the monster would still be in his chair.

Pacific Daily News File Photo


  1. can't wait for the wheels of justice to grind adrian cristobal to exceedingly small bits.

  2. Ah, how the picture now becomes clear, Apuron waters down the Sex abuse policy to protect his self serving interest, Deacon Claros as SARC pronounces Apuron Innocent of all charges, for sure for sure, he is so confident he tells the media that "There is no Investigation". Apuron throws Wadeson under the bus, and relocates him to SF to detract attention from him, His Zero tolerance Sex Abuse Policy that he develops also has zero enforcement and is written to insure that it is not applicable to him. But how can Apuron apply this policy on Licken Louie, and not to Wadeson, that would be double standard, and would raise a lot of questions, so he just sends Louie on a long term vacation, until the people of Guam forgets, and while Louie is somewhere basking in the sun, Apuron throws a bone to the Guam faithful telling us that a canonical investigation is taking place, Yeah right. Followed a year later with a testimony from Adrian, that in fact the investigation has been happening for a year, but no feedback. When the faithful start asking for status on the Louie issue, Apuron quickly works his connection with the NCW powers, and gets Bishop Balin to conduct a quicky fake investigation and issue an exoneration proclamation clearing Louie of all charges. But where is Quitugua amidst all this ruckus, Where is the Advisor to the AB, the second in command, the Canon Lawyer whose responsibility it is to advise the AB? In his silence, he approves and is party to all that is taking place. But what can we say about the testimony of Deacon Tenorio who tells us that AB Apuron is "not capable" of performing sex abuse. How can these Church Official function in their capacity as ministers of the truth? They should do themselves and us all a favor and step down.

    1. apuron OUT... apuron OUT... apuron OUT... apuron OUT... apuron OUT...

      As we all know brother tony just loves following rules…

      When a cleric is proposed for a new assignment, transfer, residence in another diocese, or diocese in a country other than the United States, or residence in the local community of a religious institute, the sending bishop or major superior will forward and the receiving bishop or major superior will review-before assignment-an accurate and complete description of the cleric's record, including whether there is anything in his background or service that would raise questions about his fitness for ministry.

      So when fr. Luis Camacho was transferred to further is desired proclivity, I'm highly confident that the chancery leadership with their overflowing abundance of moral aptitude… who are recognized for their unending dedication to excel in the performance of duty… and have highly distinguished reputations for their standards of conduct... and are also world known for their tenacity and strict adherence to policy and protocols, that on the very evening that luis bid farewell to Guam and his peeps, they all stood brothers in arms, and as one person they rigorously and thoroughly stumped on every the letter of the law…

      I’m for sure for sure, that the “SARC” officer can attest to his diligence in which the policy was carried out… which is the only true guarantee for the protection of children and young people… right larry…


      apuron OUT... apuron OUT... apuron OUT... apuron OUT... apuron OUT...

  3. I remember someone commenting why the victims just came out at this time. Why not during the time he was going to be installed as archbishop. Putting the blame on the victims and failing to put the blame squarely on the person being installed is truly missing the point. Tim, you're right. There is maliciousness in accepting the position. It was to ensure protection of himself. Imagine, in less than 5 years, he will be retiring and if these things didn't come out, he would have retired unblemished inspite of.

  4. Archbishop Byrnes, these are the clergymen you should concentrate your disciplinary action on: Fr. Adrian Cristobal; Msgr. David C. Quitugua; Fr. Edivaldo; Deacon Larry Claros; Deacon Frank Tenorio; Deacon Dominic Kim. These guys lied, covered-up corruption and criminal activities within the Archdiocese. Also, Archbishop, please remove the NCW presbyters from all the parishes where they are fronting as pastors but are really there to establish NCW protestant communities and to do this all using parish resources. They are also there to support the NCW organization and leadership, by doing whatever they can do with the parish resources. For example, in Agat, they took over the Santa Ana Chapel AFTER the parishioners raised funds to refurbish the chapel for use by the community living in Agat, especially in the Santa Ana area. Fr. Alberto does not do any funerals on Saturdays because he is with his community and other NCW presbyters. What pastor puts his organization above the needs of the parish? What kind of shepherds are being produced out of that seminary in Yona? Remove the NCW from Guam, Archbishop. You have the power and authority to do that, by revoking their invitation to be here in Guam. Then just require your priests to institute adult catechizes in their respective parishes. May be easier said than done, but with the Faithful behind you, and a good plan, we can move mountains.

    1. Please add Alberto Rodriguez-Salamanca to your list.

    2. In Archbishop Schneider's accurate phrase, Judaeo-Protestant (Galatians, II Corinthians) "communities".

    3. And don't believe anything Jackie the Trained Lawyer has to say either. She's just as big a liar as the rest of them.

  5. Apuron is an evil rabid dog.
    In time he will die of his own self inflicted rabis.
    Regarding Flores he also contributed to the fall of Agana. He is no saint. In time I hope he will be exposed for what he is. But I was more concerned with ousting Apuron. But really had Flores have been a decent person he would not have supported Apuron unless... there is more to this story than we know! Flores gave you the impression he was dignified. He was not. He was a piece of shit covering up Fr.Louis Fr.Apuron and many more. Reality is people of Guam our native blood in bishops have all been evil men.

  6. what parish is david the former VG assigned to now?

    1. believe lurch lives inside seminay. Best he not serving a parish. Let's pray he leaves Guam. Lurch is hated to see him on a parish will be hard for others.

  7. Thank you, Tim, for clarifying the record.

    I do not know about canon law, but in civil law evidence of “prior bad acts” (including crimes beyond the statute of limitations) may be introduced to prove motive, among other things.