Sunday, February 26, 2017

THE THREE "KIKO" STOOGES

Pope quietly trims sanctions for sex abusers seeking mercy

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/pope-quietly-trims-sanctions-sex-abusers-seeking-mercy-45732198

This is an extremely disturbing article, and I don't think it's an "interpretation" problem. But most disturbing is this:

"Francis recently named O'Malley, who heads his sex-abuse advisory commission..."



O'Malley is Cardinal Sean O'Malley, Archbishop of Boston, and not only is he a hard core kiko, he sits on the board of the Domus Jerusalem, Inc., which is the money vehicle behind Kiko. 

Obviously as a fellow kiko, O'Malley has a vested interest in propping up Apuron and may even be financing Apuron's fugitive life, if not his legal team. 

Watch O'Malley. When worse comes to worst he will obey Kiko and intervene with Francis. O'Malley and Kiko both know that Apuron is guilty as hell, but they are going to do everything they can to keep him from being defrocked, not because they care about Apuron, but because of how it will look for Kiko Arguello and his pedophile-pervert-hiding Neocatechumenal Way. 

25 comments:

  1. only one good way to look at this! in order to obtain mercy you have to admit a crime. Sounds like some guilty party has arranged a plea bargain? eg Apuron will admit guilt if offered mercy. End result - abused in Guam properly compensated (hopefuly paid for by NCW)and political pressure off NCW.
    One problem solved. However the NCW cannot be let off the hook!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So far Francis has said next to nothing about the admission of sun or guilt. In his book there is only mercy without justice.

      Delete
    2. We hear so much about MERCY - Year of Mercy and Pope Francis' many urgings for people to show mercy, a if it were panacea for all evil. Great! Question to the Pope: Is showing mercy to victims of sex abuse one such group to show mercy (thru justice) to? Too much talk; to little action. What gives?

      Delete
  2. I find Francis very disturbing and I don't trust him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Held off for a long time. Couldn't imagine not supporting THE POPE. But what is going on?

      Delete
  3. off topic and old news to some, but same concerns and questions.

    In view of the tremendous support Cardinal O’Malley has given the Neocatechumenate Way here in Boston, BCI has been trying to figure out the Neocatechumenates for a little while now.

    A year ago, we thought their fund-raiser was a good cause, but the deeper we look, the more we emerge with many more questions than answers.

    https://bostoncatholicinsider.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/neocatechumenate-questions/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Neos are all smoke and mirrors. They pretend to be conservative but in fact they are a proto-protestant sect.
      Their specialty is money laundering through a complex system of not for profit associations which allow them to cover for traveling and large salaries.
      They also have a large amount of cover companies that provide services ( at least in theory) for high service fees.It is a huge scam

      Delete
    2. In europe money laundering is a criminal offense, can you give the names of illegal companies that operate in this activity.


      Delete

    3. Especially in Italy, where the mafia-type criminal association, involves the application of the "41bis code", a harsh law,
      which reduces the life of the prisoners, to something akin to a Soviet gulag

      Delete
    4. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)March 1, 2017 at 5:03 AM

      Thank you, Anon 8:11. I suggest you follow Guam’s decades old experience with the RMS here in JungleWatch (see old posts whose links are located on the bottom right of this blog. Read especially the links to “Orchestrated,” “Redemptoris Mater Seminary” and “RMS – The Seminary Scam”). Read also the back-up documents about Guam’s RMS which you can find by clicking on the tab above “File Box.” The subject matters in the "File Box" are listed in alphabetical order. The evaluation and subsequent report about Guam’s RMS commissioned by Abp. Hon (Apostolic Administrator sede plena to Guam in 2016) is another valuable read about Guam’s RMS. Guam has/had the same questions about the RMS as outlined in the link of the Boston Catholic insider that you included in your comment. Wherever the NCW exists, they bring with them the same questionable, non-transparent, and heretical operations to the dioceses in which they form a community.

      The disappointing reality is that some bishops outsource their responsibility of forming priests instead of continuing with the tried and true way of the traditional diocesan or community vocation programs. Instead, some take the short cut way and partner with and outsource that responsibility to the RMS’ priest factory formation program for the sheer purpose of raising the number of seminarians and ordinations in their diocese. Guam has experienced first hand that the quality of RMS presbyters are sub-par (in all dimensions) to the traditionally formed priests, yet the archdiocese is responsible for their temporal maintenance. Basically, the local Faithful are expected to literally and figuratively pay for what they didn’t want to buy in the first place --- thanks to Abp. Apuron and the long lasting unfortunate effects of his decisions and actions, including allowing an RMS to be established on Guam.

      The BCI’s questions about funding of the Boston RMS and expenses of its seminarians were/are questions posited, too, by the Faithful of Guam about the Guam RMS. To date there is no solid answer. The cost of running and maintaining such an operation and supporting its seminarians is a cost that is likley to be greater than the funds raised from Guam’s local Faithful. In fact, the former Board of the RMS, all comprised of NCW followers and dissolved in 2016, made a statement in 2016 “… the majority of RMS funds already comes from private donations, and the net subsidy from the Archdiocese for 2016 was only $26,100.” The question is: who are those private donors? In Guam the theory is that the monies and other assets collected from the NCW followers in general, financially support the RMS (there are 100 of them worldwide) through the NCW’s internal money collecting and laundering scheme.

      The NCW program came into effect in 1964. The first RMS opened by the NCW was in 1988. In the 24 years between 1964 and 1988, somehow the NCW devised a “tool” to keep itself going and establish deep roots in a diocese through a seminary program, the RMS. The deal they present to the local bishops is: we’ll find men for you and form them [in our NCW way] into priests for your diocese; then you’ll get the high marks for producing lots of priestly vocations from your diocese. Sadly, if a close look is given to the quality of presbyters from the RMS, as mentioned above, Guam has experienced that RMS presbyters are sub-par (in all dimensions) to the traditionally formed priests. The main job of a priest it to get each and every faithful to heaven. I think some priests, including those higher up in the clergy ladder, have forgotten this main mission of their vocation or, are so malformed to begin with that this job description was never a part of their vocation to begin with.

      Delete
  4. Looking at the photo, it is becomes so difficult to comprehend if some of these men in brown are following the same mission as the man who heard the voice that saying “Francis, rebuild My Church which is falling into ruin.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebuild or repair the church? Make it as good as it was or change it into another way? Must be the evolving desire of men (like ones in photo) for something else. Bring Santo Papa into the mix and it gets better or worse. I'll stay with whom I came from.

      Delete
    2. I remember "Kiko, Give me more Priest" Chaput who instead of petitioning the Lord and Master of the Harvest, God Himself to send him more priest, instead he begs his Lord, Kiko to give him more priest. Well, he will get exactly what he asks for, more presbyters formed in the RMS factory. I also agree with Pope Francis that these priests and bishops who engage in acts of sexual abuse against children suffer from a disease, A disease of the heart, a depraved heart. The fact that they are teachers of the faith, and curator of souls by profession having received extraordinary instructions on the precepts of God, means that they should be held to a higher accountability for their actions, especially against innocent children who look up to them as spiritual father figures. What greater violation of trust can there be except when these supposed men of God, abuse the Lord's innocent lambs, and what injustice can the vicar of Christ have to say "who is he to judge" these grave sins. Is he not turning a blind eye against the atrocities committed to these victims? This is perhaps the very reason for us to look beyond the works and self serving actions of man, and focus our eyes on the Savior himself who is the way, the truth and the life.

      Delete
  5. make it public. take it to civil court. sue apuron and the Church (including Pope Mercy)!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Absolution = smarties according to Fisher.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Based on his past performance, Philadelphia's arch-conservative, elitist Archbishop Chaput doesn't give a damn about child protection. He and Francis dislike each other, so a coveted Red Hat is not in Capuchin Chaput's future at age 72 or so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chaput, like Kiko, is not an arch-conservative.
      He is the Catholic equivalent of a RINO to the republican party.
      Kiko also pretends to be a conservative, but he is everything but.
      These people are pretenders, posing as conservatives. In reality they are moles for an old cabal, bent on destroying the Church from within. Read the whole history of the Catholic modernist movement, then you start understanding the issues.
      All the rest is smoke and mirrors.

      Delete
    2. Chaput is a genuine arch-conservative. He's always been a mainstay of that awful Napa Institute in California and an icon of its wealthy, elitist groupies. His only interests are money and power.

      Delete
    3. It is a mistake to equate wealthy and elitist groupies of the Napa Institute with conservatives. Actually many international elitists who are at odds with real conservatism support this Institute.
      You can be vying for power and money, without being a conservative. Look at the many leftist billionaires who are very actively involved in nefarious activities against the Catholic Church, and support financially moles within the Church.

      Delete
  8. Frenchie, you don't know the Napa Institute founders, Directors and supporters personally. I do. I've lived and worked among them for decades and know their network well, chanceries included. I no longer have anything to do with them because I know their true colors.

    The movers and shakers are are a rotten bunch of very wealthy arch-conservatives who literally own 2 or 3 California dioceses. Since NI's billionaire tax attorney-founder gave $47 million to CUA's Business School last year, you might say he owns the US Bishops too.





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. How would you know that Frenchie doesn't.
      2. If they're "arch conservatives" and the "own" the USCCB, then they are doing a very bad job of it since the USCCB is sickly liberal.
      3. You appear to have a different definition of conservative.

      Delete
  9. Chaput invited an obscure, extremely wealthy, ultra-conservative sodality from Peru into both Denver and Philadelphia. This, after it was reported that the scandalous organization is nothing but a cover for predatory homosexuals and pedophiles in Peru. I don't remember the group's name, but it's easy to find on the Internet because of all the nasty news it generated.

    The Vatican has been hiding the phony sodality's unprosecuted lay founder in Rome for quite a while. A huge scandal about the perverse group broke last year. Allegedly, there was some type of half-baked Vatican investigation and a recent apology from the culprits.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it's easy to find then why didn't you?

      Delete
    2. Tim - Because I won't mollycoddle narrow-minded provincials who can't see past their front porches. If the topic interests you, look it up yourself.

      Delete
    3. LOL As I suspected. Another condescending know it all from the outside who knows better than us mere "provincials," who just happen to be getting something done about the crap you can only complain about from behind "anonymous." I've let you have your fun. Now run along and pretend that you matter somewhere else. Bye.

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch