Tuesday, April 4, 2017

GUAM DAILY POST: Parent asks school to drop bishop's name

23 comments:

  1. It used to be called St. Jude or Cathedral Grade School. Let's go back to one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Archbishop Byrnes' reply that the name change request came "simply from one parent" misses the fact that Bishop Baumgartner (by Brouliard's admitting that he confessed and sought guidance), failed in his responsibility to the alter boys and ultimately the parents who placed their trust in the church and its leadership. A hundred good deeds hardly justifies the single grave wrong of allowing this predator to continue harming innocent children. Archbishop Byrnes is wrong to suggest waiting for more parents to speak up. Doing the right thing shouldn't require community pressure. You'd think that the church would have learned that by now!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. Byrnes was never supportive of the abuse victims.

      Schools in heavily Catholic Ballarat, Australia are removing the name of notorious pedophile-enabling Bishop Ronald Mulkearns from plaques out of respect for his victims. Retired Mulkearns admitted his guilt before dying from cancer recently.

      Victim-hating Cardinal Pell who was accused of abusing boys was born and raised in Ballarat. Australia's most violent child abuse crimes occurred there at the hands of homosexual priests and Irish Province Christian Brothers. All of the Brothers' schools and orphanages were closed. The buildings were demolished and the properties were sold.

      Delete
    2. You don't know crap about Byrnes.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous courage. It's precious.

      Delete
    4. Fr.Matthew Blockley.April 5, 2017 at 11:41 PM

      with all due respect 12:17am Archbishop Byrnes is a very good man managing a very difficult situation with respect dignity. He deserves our respect.

      Delete
    5. Fr.Matthew Blockley.April 5, 2017 at 11:43 PM

      We only blast bad guys on this blog not good guys.

      Delete
  3. Fr.Matthew Blockley.April 4, 2017 at 4:47 PM

    The parent who raises this question certainly has a valid point to be explored. My personal thinking is that anyone who failed to stop abuse when infact they had knowledge it was taking place should be removed from all honor. I would suspect both deceased bishops knew knowingly allowing it to continue. If this is proven beyond doubt than Archbishop Byrnes must begin a process to remove names. It may also later mean removing the remains of Archbishop Flores from the Cathedral Basilica so the good people of Guam are not reminded of this tragic period in Guams history.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many, if not all, bishops of "happy memory" made the grave errors of moving priests around. The few priests who were reported where hidden/protected. The abuse problem didn't start in the last 50 years. To this day the religious orders give errant members non pastoral positions. Repeat- to this day. Jesuits, Capuchins, on and on. They can't claim this is not true. For sure, for sure.

      Delete
    2. Not errors, premeditated crimes.

      Those filthy bishops knew exactly what they were doing, and why. Prime examples: Mahony and Law who are directly responsible for thousands of children being raped. Both of those bastards should have been defrocked and handed over to civil authorities for prosecution.

      I hope Apuron gets his head handed to him.

      Delete
  4. May as well remove the statue of St. John Paul II in Agana because he favored the Neos. How about Archbishop Flores statue in Tamuning, you want that removed too?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John Paul II was notoriously defensive of pedophiles like monster Maciel who founded the Legionaries of Christ and he remained hostile toward the victims. He steadfastly refused to meet with them.

      Delete
    2. John Paul II is the one who first approved the evil Neos. He's the reason Guam is infected by them.

      Delete
  5. Fr.Matthew Blockley.April 4, 2017 at 9:24 PM

    Regarding the statue of St.John Paul 11. He is a saint and we recognize that. But let us also remember that in his years as pope the church endured so many crisis in leadership throughout the world in the men he appointed as bishops. Camacho Apuron were his appointments.perceived conservatives were appointed these conservatives turned out to often be the problems.
    The growth in new church movements bloomed under JP2 once again not all these movements were a blessing for the church. Infact many became a problem.I have seen it all. The conclusion now being we must return to the authentic Catholic faith built on Sacred Scriptute and Tradition. Following the next latest fad will lead us away from Salvation not towards Salvation. And if your like me Im walking to heaven and its the Catholic Church in her teaching that guides me.
    Regarding the statue no need to remove it. I think the important thing is to be balanced in all we do. I think everyone at heart wants peace and respect for all but at the same time there needs to be some Justice to all those who still suffer in silence because of 30 years of diaster of two men who in my opinion were absoloute disasters as bishops.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Fr.Matthew Blockley.April 4, 2017 at 9:41 PM

    The Archbishop Flores Statue reminds people of the good Archishop Flores we learned of.But just say it is later proven he knew of and allowed abusive priests to work in Guam. Just imagine if Archbishop Flores knew about Fr.Camacho and was active in promoting him as bishop of the CNMI.I find that rather sickening. And if I lived on Guam and I daily saw that statue i would ask the question why are we giving honor to a man who allowed the dysfunction to continue. This is how I see it. I'm not saying go out and remove any statue. I'm wanting the good folks of Guam to simply reflect on the past in a constructive way so these mistakes are never made again.If Archbishop Flores knew of Father Camacho and I strongly suspect he did then why did he ask Rome to make him the First bishop of the CNMI. There were other much more abel candidates than the Father Camacho of Inarajan.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'd have no problem with getting rid of statues or changing names, but at this point the only evidence of anything against Baumgartner is Brouillard's account of things and Brouillard was one very sick man. I am certain more evidence will come out that will further implicate Baumgartner and when it does the name change should be addressed them. However, I am wondering how many are really willing to go down this road since it will ultimately lead to the sainted Archbishop Flores. It was Flores of course who shipped Brouillard off to Minnesota.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree that Brouillard was one really sick bastard. The accounts of his grooming and manipulation of children were so deviously geared towards mere satisfaction of his libido, no matter the emotional, mental, sociological and physical scars to young impressionable minds. He was so sick that even after he was shipped off and eventually outed in Minnesota, he has been trying to return and even used Saipan as a springboard to re-enter Guam. I cannot think of any diabolic entity more than one who listens to his insatiable depravity than the moral consequences of his actions. I do not know whether or not the legal authorities and church leadership in Minnesota were tipped off about this predator, however, yet it is crucial in damning other men of the cloth who willingly acquiesced to an "out of sight, out of mind" suspension. These, too, are complicit in the further abuse of children.

      Delete
    2. How about replacing San Vitores with Matapang?

      Delete
    3. Minnesota is a notorious pedophile dump. All of its major dioceses were bankrupted by perverts, including the one where Brouillard was hidden.

      The predatory homosexual, abuse-enabling archbishop of bankrupt St. Paul-Minneapolis, largest diocese in the State, and one of his auxiliary bishops were removed from office and benched.

      Delete
    4. I agree with you about Minnesota, especially since it was the only state which voted for Mondale, however, when you label a priest or bishop "homosexual," can you please provide something more than your accusation. The abuse-enabling is not in question.

      Delete
  8. This is not about AB Byrnes or an attempt to smear or protect AB Flores, for that matter. Despite the good by Bishop Baumgartner, it is fact, as admitted by Brouliard that he failed to protect those boys. Several years ago a man named Jerry Sandusky (Asst Coach for Penn State) was found to be as vile as Brouliard. He also started a non-profit to "help" young boys (The Second Mile). Turns out he used that organization as a bucket to fish his next victims. This is not unlike Brouliard's use of the Boy Scouts. In the end Sandusky was sentenced to life. As for the head coach of Penn State, the famous Joe Paterno... It was determined he should have known what was happening. It was determined that he failed as a leader to prevent Sandusky and failed to protect those victims. As a result, the famous 900 lbs, 7 ft statue of Coach Paterno on the Penn State campus was removed as a way to bridge the division and start the healing. In our local case concerning Bishop Baumgartner, he knew and did nothing, this is clear. If it is found that Archbishop Flores is guilty of the same, then he as well chose his ultimate fate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Admitted by Brouillard." The only credence that can be given this is Brouillard's own admission about what he himself did. He doesn't get to "admit" what someone else did. Before we trash Baumgartner there needs to be a little more than a very sick man's account of what someone else said.

      Additionally, there is the matter of the confessional seal. I don't know the answer to this but I have serious questions about what sort of action is actually actionable when the information is obtained under the confessional seal.

      As for the Sandusky thing: "if Jerry Sandusky had been a Roman noble or a teacher at an English boarding school instead of a football coach in America, he not only would have not gone to jail, he would probably have been envied and imitated."

      http://www.themassneverends.com/2012/07/why-is-jerry-sandusky-in-jail.html

      Delete
  9. How bout JR San Agustin? Since someone step up and complained!

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch