FOOD FOR THOUGHTS

 posted by frenchie

Following my Post regarding Notre Dame of Paris,  I received several comments asking if I saw any similarities with what we have recently witnessed, here on Guam?

Let me clarify the context, the question was following my explanation that all religious building in France are owned by either the local government or the national government, and that the Church is just a tenant of sort, free of rent, but not owning the Churches where we celebrate our own religion.

The people posing the question to me, were referencing the recent purchase by the Government of Guam of the buildings housing the Chancery, as well as the residence of the Archbishop.

I must say that I had not thought of this issue, under such an angle. Yet, it seems that it is worth to ask ourselves a few questions, since if we are not paying with our contributions, we are with our taxes. Worse, after some reflexions, one can wonder what are the real intentions of the Governor, since her family's bank is on one side the largest creditor of the Archdiocese, while she herself is one of the most rabid proponent of abortion on the island. Could Lourdes Leon Guerrero Cook benefit either financially or politically from said purchase, by holding it as a Damocles sword of sort over the head of the new Archbishop?

The plot thickens if you consider her close relationship with some very influential members of the local clergy, who had been smudged in the past by some less than above the board accounting methods. Further the chief of staff of the Governor, happens to be a close protege of one of said influential members of the local Clergy. Actually it is through this personal and close relationship that a meeting was established during the visit of Cardinal Tagle at the end of November, between his eminence and the Governor and Lt Governor, bypassing the Archbishop himself, who was left out to dry. (and probably not very pleased)

Several other incidents, have happened before and since this mishap, where the same actors have sidelined Archbishop Ryan, undermining our new prelate. It also appears that the people that are still at the Chancery, dating back to the Apuron years, have not given the best advices to the Archbishop, specially in regards to communication. (is this incompetence or sabotage?)

Regular readers of this site, have surely noted that Tim Rohr has been quite critical (with some very good reasons) of some of the communications of our newly minted Bishop in regards to public statements, relation to the Neos, as well as public appearances, which could be charitably qualified as ill advised and socially awkward.

Now that Fr Concovar has been given the duty of being the Bishop of Chalan Kanoa, we should all watch carefully who our own Archbishop will entrust with the crucial and poisoned title of Vicar General. The decision should be very telling and give us a small window of opportunity in the thought process of our new Leader. Lets pray that he takes the corrective measures necessary, and surround himself with true servants of the Church, and not ill intentioned clerics who do not have his best interest, and our Church best interest in mind

It would certainly be a shame to fall back into the bad habits of the Apuron's era. Perhaps it is a good time for some of the individuals who had jokeyed for the Archbishop position, to take a deep breath, and make peace with the fact that they did not get the job. There are way too many serious issues in this Archdiocese for a few bruised egos to sabotage the few inroads we have made over the last 10 years. Archbishop Jimenez needs good advices and some solid support at the Chancery, not some career driven individuals who do not have our best interest in mind. Time out!!!