QUESTIONS FOR THE ARCHBISHOP

By Tim Rohr

Even though my name is on every post I publish, usually the content doesn't originate with me, but from others, sometimes many others, who direct their concerns and questions to me simply because of the power of this blog. So it's not me asking the following questions, it's many people, and they deserve answers. 

I don't want to get down into the weeds about with the theological beliefs and liturgical practices of the Neocatechumenal Way. If there are abuses, if there are heretical teachings, then that's on the archbishop and the pastors.

That said, we, the laity, still have a right to ask certain questions relative to what is set out in the Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way. The Statutes is the NCW's governing document, and it's a public document. It's public because the Statutes is the Church's way of holding the NCW accountable, not just to pastors of the Church, but to the Church as a whole. 

Following are particular statutes followed by our questions:

Title 1, Art. 1, § 2. The Neocatechumenal Way is at the service of the bishop as one of the forms of diocesan implementation of Christian initiation and of ongoing education in faith.

The NCW is "at the service of the bishop." Given that our experience in this archdiocese for the better part of thirty years has been that the archbishop (Apuron) was literally and visibly (if not slavishly) at the service of the NCW (which is even now most likely still protecting and providing for him), we would like to know:

1. Exactly how is the NCW "at your service?
2. Are you directing their activities? 
3. Are you overseeing their activities?
4. Have you approved of their activities? All of them?

Title 1, Art. 3, 5th to maintain regular relations with the diocesan bishops

• How often do you meet with the so-called "Itinerant Catechist Team:" David & Maruxa Atienza?
• Do you have "regular" meetings? If so, how often?
• (By the way, the Atienza's have lived in Guam for many years, so they can hardly be called "itinerant.")

Title 1, Art. 4, § 1. The Neocatechumenal Way, being an itinerary of Catholic formation that is implemented in the dioceses through services freely given, has no material goods of its own.

• What does the NCW do with the money and other "material goods" they collect if the NCW "has no material goods of its own?"
• Does it go to you?
• Are they paying their fair share of the bankruptcy damages? (All the parishes and schools are required to pay, which means that parishioners and parents are being made to pay. What about the NCW? Are they contributing to the damages?
• Is there any accounting at all?
• Is the NCW accountable to the pastors of the parishes where they operate, to you, to the archdiocesan finance council? Who?

Note: We do know they must be collecting a lot of money. According to the meeting minutes of Nov. 21, 2021 for Rainan Ilanget Foundation, Inc., the corporation for which the Atienza’s are the guarantors, the “Neo-house” in Asan has a mortgage of $800,000 with a projected total cost of 3 to 4 Million Dollars with the "improvements."

By the way, the minutes also identify Fr. Alberto Salamanca as another guarantor, along with the Atienza's. According to Investopedia, a "guarantor is "an individual or entity who promises to pay a debt if the main party defaults. They act as a backup source of payment if the borrower can’t cover the debt." 

Archbishop, can you tell us how two itinerant catechists and priest of this archdiocese are in a position to guaranty a debt of $800,000 and projected to increase into the millions? 

And speaking of Rainan Ilanget Foundation, Inc., have you read their articles of incorporation? It's really the Neocats, who aren't supposed to have "material goods of its own," devising a way to have "material goods of its own," and more importantly, to avoid any accountability to you, Archbishop, and of course, ultimately to the rest of the Church in Guam. Here's an excerpt:

In short, Archbishop, this is a parallel church, with a governance, real property, and bank accounts all its own. Are you good with that?

And speaking of the building in Asan, the "Neo-house" with the $800,000 mortgage, are they celebrating "Mass" there? (I know they don't call it that.) If so, is it with your permission? And if so, who are the priests who are celebrating Mass there? Do they have your permission? Did you give your okay to consecrate that space? Did you yourself consecrate it? Questions, questions, questions. Do you even know what's going on?

You know, there is a section in the Statutes which permits such a foundation:

Title 1, Art. 4, § 2. When in a diocese it is considered useful to financially support initiatives and activities for the evangelization realized through the Neocatechumenal Way, the diocesan bishop, at the request of the International Responsible Team of the Way, will consider the suitability of erecting an autonomous diocesan foundation, with juridical personality, regulated by its own statutes, which will also be recognized by the civil authorities. This may also be supported by oblatory donations made by participants in the Neocatechumenal Way, as well as by foundations and other individuals.

But read carefully, Archbishop. Such a foundation can only be permitted by YOU. See the underlined supra. We know Archbishop Byrnes did not approve this. On March 15, 2017, Archbishop Byrnes slapped the Neocats with a "pause," a moratorium (to be addressed next). The aforesaid articles of incorporation for the Raina foundation were filed with Guam Rev and Tax nine months later on December 14, 2017. So it appears that the Neocats just did what they usually do, which is whatever they want to do and the hell with the hierarchy. 

So, speaking of the moratorium, aka the "pause," let's review:

On March 15, 2017, the late Archbishop Byrnes imposed a moratorium on all expansion of the NCW in this archdiocese. On August 18, 2021, then Episcopal Vicar, Fr. Ronald Richards, on behalf of Archbishop Byrnes, addressed a letter to David and Maruxa Atienza, the “Itinerant Catechist Team” for Guam, noting that the Atienza’s had ignored the "pause." 

Apparently the Atienza's continued to ignore the 2021 "reminder," because on March 27, 2023, then Vicar General, Fr. Romeo Convocar, had to write another letter reminding the entire Neocatechumenal Way on Guam that the 2017 moratorium was still in effect: “…let it be clear that the moratorium on the formation of new communities of the Neocatechumenal Way remains in effect unless otherwise instructed. All must abide by the directive.”

We know that the Atienza's continue to ignore this instruction because recently (and to my knowledge) parishioners, including a priest, have been "prospected." So the obvious question is, Archbishop Jimenez, is: What is the current status of the moratorium? Have you lifted it, modified it, annulled it? If any of the foregoing, would you please let us know so that we, the laity, aren't confused and scandalized by what we see. And if you haven't done any of the foregoing, then the question is: Do you intend to enforce it, and if not, why not?

Your continued silence on this matter gives growing credence to the rumor that you owe your relatively quick rise to your present rank to the Neocat generals. One can imagine said generals whispering to the Atienza's: "Don't worry. Keep growing the communities in Guam, but, for now, keep a low profile. There will soon be a new bishop in Guam who will be friendly to our cause."

Whether such a scenario is real or not is still speculative, but the Atienza's continued flaunting of authentic authority is demonstrable and not speculative. So we are left to believe that our current archbishop is in fact "friendly to their cause." 

Title II, Chapter 1, Art. 6, § 3. The Neocatechumenal Way will seek to foster in its recipients a mature sense of belonging to the parish and to promote relations of profound communion and collaboration with all the faithful and with the other elements of the parish community.

All I can say here is: Really?

Title II, Chapter 1, Art. 7 § 2. ...In the community the neocatechumens become adult in faith, growing in humility, simplicity and praise, submitted to the Church.

"Submitted to the Church?" Is that what we are seeing when absolute directives (e.g. the moratorium) are ignored, if not laughed at and publicly flaunted, and when the "neocatechumens" form a foundation in clear violation of their own statutes so it can funnel millions to thenselves? Hello?

Title II, Chapter II, Art. 9 .The Neocatechumenate starts in the parish, at the invitation of the pastor/parish priest, with kerygmatic catecheses, called initial catecheses, contained in the Orientations for the Teams of Catechists. 

Now here's one. Archbishop Byrnes demanded a copy of the aforesaid "Orientations," aka the "Catechetical Directory" from the Atienza's, and he was functionally told to get lost. He never received a copy. Do you have a copy, Archbishop? If not, don't you think you should have one? You are the bishop, the chief shepherd of souls in this diocese, answerable to God for everyone of the sheep place in your care. These people, these "catechists" are teaching in your name and by your authority. Do you know what they're teaching? Do you care?

There's a lot more. 

But I'm getting tired. But just one more thing. I'm not going to go through the whole history again (it's well documented already on this blog), but the Neocats, especially in the persons of the arch-neocats, Adrian Cristobal and his sidekick, Edivaldo, were responsible, more than anybody else, for setting in motion the events that drove this archdiocese into bankruptcy. 

Let me know if you need an explanation. Meanwhile, please find out how much of those millions over at Raina are going to help us pay those hundreds of minors who were raped, molested, and otherwise ruined by the clergy of this archdiocese, including some, if not many, by your predecessors.