WE HIT NINE MILLION WHEN WE WEREN'T EVEN LOOKING

And now views from 207 countries. The latest is Uzbekistan. 

And 44,000 views in the last 30 days and we hardly posted a thing. 

Hmmmm. 

What could be happening?

THIS IS NO SMALL DEAL. BISHOP SCHNEIDER IS ONE OF THE FEW.

Other POSTS about or referencing Bishop Schneider on this blog 

WHERE WE CAME FROM. WHERE WE'RE GOING.

Yesterday, December 29, 2019, there was an article in one of the local papers about the imposition of the pallium on Archbishop Byrnes. Essentially, publicly celebrates Archbishop Byrnes as the new Archbishop of Agana.

Imposition of pallium for Archbishop Michael Byrnes in January

Coincidentally (?) today, Facebook reminded me of the main event which eventually led to our new Archbishop.

The PDN article is no longer available, but the JungleWatch link is.

http://www.junglewatch.info/2014/12/apostolic-visitors-on-removal-of-fr.html?

GUAM CATHOLIC CHURCH - PERFECT STORM OF CONTROVERSY

Note: The article, though posted to the subject website on 12/17/19, appears to have been originally written and published just after the first announcement that Apuron had been found guilty. However, it is an article that JungleWatch hasn't seen before and it develops the backstory of Apuron's relationship with the NCW. 

Guam Catholic Church sees a “perfect storm” of controversy

HAGATNA, Guam (AP) — The Catholic Church on the Pacific island of Guam has been devastated by allegations that its longtime archbishop sexually abused altar boys. But even before the scandal broke, Guam‘s church was divided over another issue — the presence of a controversial European lay movement that became so toxic that a community of nuns fled to the mainland U.S. in despair. CONTINUED

WHAT DOES THE REPLACEMENT OF FILONI BY TAGLE MEANS FOR US ON GUAM

 (posted by Frenchie)

It has been a week now since the official announcement of the departure of Filoni as head of the Congregation for the Evangelization of people.

On many Catholic publication around the world, much has been made about Pope Francis choice for his replacement: Cdl Tagle of the Philippines.

Most of the Press in Italy, and around the world, has drawn parallels between the positions of Tagle and those of Pope Francis. Many have speculated that Francis has been laying the way for a possible successor . For us on Guam this is quite remote from our daily realities.

We know that he is knowledgeable about Guam, and that he is personally close to some of the priests on the island.

We can remember how he came to celebrate the anniversary of Msgr James,  at the Cathedral, before the latter fell victim to Apuron's accusationsof mismanagement and other issues.

This can be helpful, if some individuals resist the temptation of playing fast and loose with their private connection with the Cardinal.

Unfortunately we have learned the hard way, how some of our Priests have put their own interest ahead of the interest of the local and universal Church.

Therefore we should be very watchful, and pray intently, that these temptations do not come in the way of the efforts of Archbishop Byrnes to heal and correct the wrongs that were committed by priests that abused their position of authority.

It is our duty as parishioner to stay alert and demanding of our priests.

As far as the NCW is concerned, this is not good news. They loose one of their most devoted patron, and they have inherited instead a sometimes very critical observer.

Some of us at Junglewatch had watch with close concern the winning bidder of the Yona property.

All indications were leading to a possible reactivation of RMS in Yona, along the lines of the Tokyo and Macau latest development by Cardinal Filoni.

It is very interesting that only 4 days after the Red Pope was out of the picture, the "buyer" suddenly relented on their offer.

Tim should develop this interesting story in more details at a later date.

It looks like we came very closed to biting the bullet on that subject.

This new development is bringing us both opportunities and challenges.

Keep posted, and be watchful.

THE MORE IT CHANGES , THE MORE IT STAYS THE SAME.

(Posted by Frenchie)

Rumors had been running wild, in the Vatican for the last few weeks.

That is not really surprising in a place, where secret alliances, back stabbing and other shenanigans are held dear by a large part of some of the Princes of the Church.

Yet, the rumors became insistent  before the weekend,

and became official just over the weekend.

Cardinal Filoni, aka the red Pope was out of his job as head of the 

Congregation for the Evangelization of People.

That does not mean that Filoni is totally out of power, far from it.

He still sits on many important congregations, and has build an unparalleled 

network of patronage, and people that owe him favors.

Yet, his alliance with some of the conservatives in name only, in Rome, did not endear him to Francis or his cadre of liberation theologists.

While his former friend and temporary enemy Cardinal Pirolin suffered a 

one, two punch after the disaster of the negotiations with Beijing, where Filoni was also involved and severely criticized by Cardinal Zen, the emeritus Archbishop of Hong Kong and the de facto spiritual leader of Chinese Catholic; it put a damper on his stellar reputation of great diplomat.

There was also a long list of complaints by the Bishops of Japan about the authoritarian practices of Filoni.

We also are very well aware of the disastrous PR  that became the Scandal of Apuron, around the world, at a time when Francis did not need icing on his cake.
In fact the delaying tactics of Filoni, made several influential people very uncomfortable.

Finally his new tactic to open RMS under his direct tutelage and without really asking the local bishops, was a nail in the coffin.

The other defining factor was that Francis needed a high profile position to promote who is seen by many as an heir to the papal throne.

As you see, in Rome politics is always part of the picture.
The more it changes, the more it stays the same.

Next: what we can expect from his successor.

TANQUAM NON FUERIT - Part 3: "I THOUGHT THEY LIKED IT."

Per Parts 1 and 2 of this series, blaming "The World," and in this case, "The Sexual Revolution," for the latest installment of clergy perversions (it's definitely not the first time - see Book of Gomorrah), is not just wrong, it lays bare the real problem.

And here it is: 

The refusal of our Church leadership to own the fact that "As the Church goes, so goes the World," ... and NOT the other way around. 

And this fact ("As the Church goes...") is never clearer than in the facts which led up to the so-called "Sexual Revolution" - which our Church leadership apparently now wants to blame!!

Long before Woodstock (1969), and "The World's" orgasmic lust for "The Pill" - which essentially precipitated the sexual nirvana of sex without babies (i.e. consequences) - our Church (specifically Pope John 23) opened the Box (Pandora's) which led to both Woodstock and the Western World's rabid rush to contracept and abort itself out of existence.

In 1963, the now sainted Pope established The Pontifical Commission on Birth Control to examine the question as to whether or not Catholics could morally use The Pill to avoid pregnancy. 

It was an absurd proposition to begin with. 

The Church could never change GOD's design for the union of the procreative act with its procreative ends.

But it was the 1960's, and it appears Papa John wanted to show that...well, at least he "cared."

It's easy to see that John never intended the Commission to go anywhere. He only commissioned six non-theologians as members and separated the Commission from the Council (Vatican II), keeping personal control over it.

However, within weeks of opening both the Council and the Commission, something happened that John didn't plan on.

HE DIED. 

His successor, Paul VI, had the opportunity to close what should have never been opened. But it appears Paul (now also sainted) was even more eager to show the 1960's that he too "cared."

Instead of shutting down the investigation into a question that could only have one answer:

NO!

Paul expanded the Commission membership from the original 6 members to 72!, and included several secular members who cared little about THE CHURCH.

As you might imagine, the then-progressives in The Church went wild with glee. Paul's continuance  and sudden exponential expansion of the Commission could only mean one thing:

Catholics would soon copulate without the "threat" of babies,  just like everybody else! 

In fact, Paul all but sealed the deal, when, upon expanding the Commission in 1964, he said THIS:

"We say frankly that so far we do not have sufficient reason to consider the norms given by Pope Pius XII on this matter [of contraception] as out of date and therefore as not binding. They must be considered as valid, at least until We feel obliged in conscience to change them." - Paul VI Acta apostolicae sedis (AAS) 56 (1964) 588-59, 1964 address to the special papal commission on the use of contraceptives.

Anyone familiar with "pope-speak" will recognize that Paul isn't just giving his personal opinion (as Francis is so prone to do on airplanes), Paul is using the Papal "We," meaning, he is speaking magisterially, doctrinally, even dogmatically, and in the name of The Church. 

Amazingly, Paul cast his comments as a response to a previous Pope (Pius 12), and then lets us know that said "opinion" is subject to change if "We" (the papal We) feel obliged in conscience to change them." 

Read that again:

"until We feel obliged in conscience to change them." 

That one phrase opened the door for Catholics to, "in conscience," contracept, abort, divorce, engage in fornication and homosexual sex, vote for pro-abortion polices and politicians (i.e. the Kennedy's) and ultimately, for the Church's own priests and bishops, to rape and molest trusting young boys (and some girls) at will, in the name of "conscience" and "born that way." 

The now-dead, "Mass-Molester" (literally) of the Archdiocese of Agana, Fr. Louis Brouillard, even testified in a deposition:

"At that time, I did believe that the boys enjoyed the sexual contact and I also had gratification as well," 

Brouillard said in his affidavit. 

I.E. "IF IT FEELS GOOD, DO IT." 

Paul 6 even further cemented the idea that Catholics could make up their own mind about contraception in the very document he wrote to refute it: Humane Vitae:

6. However, the conclusions arrived at by the commission could not be considered by Us as definitive and absolutely certain, dispensing Us from the duty of examining personally this serious question. This was all the more necessary because, within the commission itself, there was not complete agreement concerning the moral norms to be proposed, and especially because certain approaches and criteria for a solution to this question had emerged which were at variance with the moral doctrine on marriage constantly taught by the magisterium of the Church.

Read that highlighted part again. 

Paul tells the Universal Church that the only reason what has always been "intrinsically evil" must remain "intrinsically evil" is due to the lack of a "complete agreement" (i.e. a unanimous vote) by something called a "commission."  

Well it was almost unanimous. Only 7 member of the 72 dissented. The majority voted in favor of lifting the Church's "ban" on birth control.

Paul tried to put the horses back in the barn on July 29, 1968, the date he promulgated Humanae Vitae. 

Woodstock would begin on August 15, 1969. 

No. It ain't the "sexual revolution...:

And NOTHING will change until we, the LAITY...call our leadership to account. And Guam has a good beginning.

CONTINUED

HEY PATRICK WALL, YOU DON'T KNOW CRAP 2.0

It's very interesting looking at these old posts with new comments.

http://www.junglewatch.info/2017/04/hey-patrick-wall-you-dont-know-crap.html?showComment=1574326271420#c616073848598925344

THIS IS WHAT REALLY NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN AGANA, GUAM

West Virginia bishop calls for predecessor, accused of sex and financial misconduct, to pay $792,000 in restitution and to apologize

November 27, 2019 at 7:59 a.m.

West Virginia’s new bishop Tuesday called for his predecessor, Michael Bransfield, to pay the diocese $792,638, apologize to victims and to the diocese, and lose his place in the diocesan cemetery as part of a restitution package for alleged financial and sexual misconduct that some church experts say is a first for a bishop. CONTINUED

DON'T BLAME HIM!

Hey, don't blame him. 

He is the product of Kiko's theology (see "Kiko and Purgatory") and Apuron's (fake) seminary. According to Kiko, there is no Purgatory. And the only reason for All Souls Day (today in Guam) is to pray for the Poor Souls in Purgatory.

So this priest makes the best of it... (sort of). 

However, let 's not get too excited about blaming Kiko or this priest or even the NCW. Almost all funeral sermons and nearly every funeral announcement in our local media - placed there by well-meaning families - misled by mostly cowardly teaching from cowardly clerics, canonizes their dearly departed loved ones as "already in heaven," or even an "ANGEL!" When in fact, they are probably suffering in Purgatory like most of us will.

Heaven, Probably Not Your Next Stop!

Personal note: Sadly. I like this priest. He normally celebrates the Mass in a reverential way which I seldom see anywhere else. Maybe the new archbishop will help. Meanwhile, the rest of us can stop "angel-icizing" and canonizing our departed relatives. They most likely need our prayers, not our platitudes.

NOT GUILTY

As part of their quest to exonerate their man, Apuron supporters were hoping that David Sablan, president of the Concerned Catholics of Guam ("CCOG") - which played a main role in exposing Apuron and having him removed as Guam's archbishop, would be found guilty in the GHURA case. Unlike Apuron, Sablan didn't run. Sablan didn't hide. He stayed and fought for the truth. That's what you do when you have nothing to hide. 

Stand tall, Dave. 

Former GHURA commissioners not guilty

The verdict is in and former Guam Housing and Urban Renewal Authority Commissioners David Sablan, Cecile Suda and Roland Selvidge have been found not guilty. CONTINUED

CLERICALISM? .

From a culture of silence to cover-ups: How Guam ended up with 280 clergy sex abuse claims

A 9-year-old boy confided in his grandmother on several occasions that the parish priest was sexually abusing him.

The grandmother spanked the boy, identified in court documents only by C.B.D. to protect his privacy. She lectured him that the priest was "God's representative and not capable of such actions."

CONTINUED

MSN vs LLG - NOT NEW

On 10/8/19, Bob Klitzkie - on his radio show TALL TALES - noted that the current public feud between Michael San Nicolas, Guam's Delegate to the U.S. Congress, and Lou Leon Guerrero, Guam's current governor, may go back to November 2013. (It occurs just after the top of the 2nd hour.)

On November 14, 2013, San Nicolas took on Guam's shameful culture of abortion - as championed by the current governor (since at least 1990) - when he went "off script" (i.e. the Democrat pro-abortion platform), and gave an impassioned speech in support of legislation which required "proper life-saving or life-sustaining treatment" for children who survive an abortion.

The bill had been vehemently opposed by our now-current governor (then-President of Bank of Guam) at a public hearing on October 10, 2013.

Video here

Leon Guerrero argued that with this bill, the Legislature was intruding on "the discretion, the responsibly, the acumen and the judgement of (the) Medical Professional…who is more equipped to make (these) decisions." (See Full Committee Report here.)

The bill was not about abortion. It was about infanticide. The child survives the abortion and is alive on the abortion table. The decision then is whether to kill the child, leave it to die, or provide medical care normally given to any other child struggling for life once born.

Bill 195-32 argued that a child, born alive, has the same right to life and normal medical care as any other child. However, Leon Guerrero argued that only medical professionals can make that decision.

San Nicolas' support of the Bill 195-32 pushed the bill to a vote:

Ten senators voted to let the baby live. Five senators voted to let the baby die. The bill was signed into law by Governor Calvo as PL 32-090. 

Given that this was about killing a child outside the womb and not inside, the bill brought into focus the hideousness that is abortion. There is little doubt that this bill, along with the steady stream of other bills brought to bear on the abortion industry by the The Esperansa Project, has resulted in the complete shutting down of an abortion industry on Guam which once killed 600 babies a year*, most of them Chamorro. 

SOURCE

* "Let me tell you, at the rate Guam Memorial Hospital is aborting children, between 400-600 a year, and most of them are not even reported. Where are the lives that we are going to protect and preserve? Here we go talking about indigenous rights and self-determination. What good is all that if we don't have our followers to follow and enjoy the fruits of our labor, of this generation's labor, of your labor and my labor to fix this island and have autonomous rights to govern our people?" Senator Elizabeth Arriola - quoted in: Asian/Pacific Islander American Women: A Historical Anthology, pg. 372, edited by Shirley Hume, Gail M. Nomura

And given the current governor's QUEST, and use of the public's resources, to find a "medical professional" to come to Guam to continue to kill mostly Chamorro babies (since no local doctor will do it), perhaps LLG has not forgotten MSN's  2013 "off script" finger to the face to his own Party power brokers. Speaking truth to power always has a price. 

PDN: "Capuchins...more Guam sex abuse claims"

Many Catholics on Guam want to grant an exception to the Capuchins. "We have an 'Capuchin' parish," they say. But they forget. Apuron was a Capuchin. And he learned his filthy trade early. And he was NOT ALONE. 


Capuchins, Boy Scouts offer confidential amounts to settle more Guam sex abuse claims

Capuchin Franciscans and the Boy Scouts of America offered confidential amounts to settle additional Guam clergy sex abuse claims, which are still subject to court approval. CONTINUED

ADRIAN CRISTOBAL CONTINUED

Last week, we did a post titled THE CRISTOBAL FACTOR. The post was motivated by an sudden uptick in the page views of a 2016 story about Adrian Cristobal's rejection of his being assigned to San Dionisio Parish in Umatac by Archbishop Hon, the Vatican-assigned Administrator. As we hadn't heard anything from or about Cristobal in awhile, we were curious as to the sudden surge in traffic. 

As some know, Cristobal, the bully who happily helped oust Fr. Paul Gofigan and Msgr. James Benavente, ran away - just like Apuron - at the first mention of an abuse allegation against him. And like Apuron, remains in hiding. Yesterday, there was news about Cristobal in the PDN: 

Archdiocese sends to Vatican Father Cristobal's case on alleged sex abuses of minors

To be continued

CURIOUS - THE CRISTOBAL FACTOR

Our "page views" have always told us a lot - and indeed - have been the main driver of this blog, which we now know eventually led to not just the overthrow of an evil bishop, but opened up the dark perverted recesses that have led directly to the heart of the Vatican. 

So why would a post from 2016 (per our page view stats) be getting the second most VIEWS this week...(September, 2019)?

Could it be an upcoming trial scheduled for November? 

By "The Way"....where is he?

TANQUAM NON FUERIT - Part 2: THE CHURCH HAS NO AUTHORITY TO BLAME "THE WORLD"

In the first installment of this series, I noted that the bishops at Vatican II (for the most part) "partied, drank, and signed" where the "Periti" (the theological experts) told them to.

The point is, that while Ben 16, et al. may want to blame the 60's and its so-called "sexual revolution" ... the "Church" (aka, it's Leadership) has...

NO AUTHORITY to blame "The World."

Jesus Christ, God, Himself, Incarnate, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, SMOTE himself upon the Wood of the Cross and leaked every last ounce of HIS PRECIOUS BLOOD into the DIRT of Golgatha - that we might have every power "in Heaven and on Earth" to OVERCOME THE WORLD.

Thus, we, ESPECIALLY CATHOLICS, and ESPECIALLY our BISHOPS, have NO RIGHT to BLAME "THE WORLD," which the Lord, Himself said that we "are the light of..." (Mt 5:14). 

SHAME ON US and SHAME ON THEM.

WE, Catholics, like no others, have the power of THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL and DIVINITY -  of OUR DEALY BELOVED, LORD,  JESUS CHRIST, CRUCIFIED - to OVERCOME this sordid, pathetic, shameful, little "World." 

How dare we blame this temporal, diabolical diversion from the stupid, sex-soaked 60's for the FILTH IN THE CHURCH, when in fact it was the FILTH IN THE CHURCH which gave us "the stupid, sex-soaked 60's and the "sexual revolution" in the first place?

What don't these pretty Prelates get? 

But then BAD bishops...and priests...started with Judas...and, 

...Jesus picked him.

(TO BE CONTINUED...)

TANQUAM NON FUERIT - Part 1

Recently, both Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and our own archbishop (of Agana, who was probably just echoing Benedict) have lain at least part of the blame - for what Benedict himself once called “the filth in the Church” - at the feet of “The Sexual Revolution.”

Reuters reported that Benedict wrote:

“Among the freedoms that the Revolution of 1968 sought to fight for was this all-out sexual freedom, one which no longer conceded any norms.”

As much as I love and respect Benedict 16 (and our new archbishop), Ben 16 must be fingered as one of the progenitors of the problem which he now wants to criticize at age 91.

Several years before 1968, and "Woodstock (1969), there was Vatican II (1961),  the Original Revolution.

Now, hang on, hear me out. I'm not the Latin Mass reactionary that some think I am (I don't even attend the only Latin Mass available on Guam - for reasons I may reveal someday).

Ben 16 himself said that he participated in throwing out the "schema" of John 23 on the FIRST day of the Council.

I copy here part of a column I wrote for the Umatuna, and titled "The Lost Synod,"  published on 3/3/13:

Pope Benedict is one of the last living major figures who was present at the Council and he has spent much of his pontificate orienting the church towards its true meaning. Thus, the news that he would be holding an informal “chat” (as he called it) about the Council just days before retirement, had the air of a sort of “tell all” - a sharing of thoughts not normally shared in the otherwise careful and restrictive world of papal statements.

The pope did not disappoint - and left us much upon which to reflect. But the comment which caught my attention was his passing reference to the “Roman Synod”. It caught my attention because the Roman Synod is rarely if ever referenced by church authorities, and is considered by some to be a “lost synod” - erased, actually.

According to the Italian historian, Romano Amerio, there is no trace of the texts of the Roman Synod in any diocesan curias or archives, and can only be found in secular libraries. (1) Given the significance of the Synod, it’s erasure from church records is a clue to why disorientation appears to plague the legacy of the Council to this day.

The Roman Synod was convened by Pope John XXIII in January, 1960. It was meant to be the “solemn forerunner of the larger gathering (Vatican II) which it was meant to prefigure and anticipate” (2), and at which, the schema, the plans for the Council, as prepared by the pope’s preparatory commission, were finalized and promulgated.

According to Amerio, Pope John believed the Council would be completed in a couple of months. The pope’s hope for a speedy council was prompted by his belief that his preparatory commission had adequately prepared the schema for the Council. Thus the Council itself would be a rather simple and straightforward affair of fleshing out the schema and ratifying the final documents. “Over by Christmas”, said the Pope on October 11, 1962, the first day of the Council. (3)

Of course the Council was NOT “over by Christmas” nor the next, nor the next. The Council carried on for three years during which Pope John died. But it could be said that his plans for the Council died first. For as Amerio recounts, and Benedict reflects, the bishops’ first order of business at the Council was to set aside every one of the prepared schema, effectively negating nearly two year’s of work by the pope’s preparatory commission and nullifying all that he promulgated at the Roman Synod. (4)

In fact, as if to emphasize that this was their Council (the bishops) and NOT the pope’s, Amerio records that not only was the Synod never referenced in any Council document,  every trace of it was deleted from church archives. It was treated, as Amerio says, “tanquam non fuerit” (“as if it had never been”). (5)

Throwing the pope’s agenda in the trash is a pretty profound way to commence an ecumenical council, especially one of the size and impact of Vatican II. However, even Pope Benedict saw this as a good thing. In his “chat”, Benedict labeled the Roman Synod a “negative model” - a view which implies that he saw the tossing of its texts overboard (even if they did contain the papal desires) a sign that the Holy Spirit was present at the Council from the beginning.

In short, the Council, immediately upon convening, unmoored itself from the pope who had convened it. And while such an action may well be evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit guiding the Council beyond the mere wishes of a particular pope, it calls into question the credibility of those who insist that the effects of the Council were envisioned by John XXIII. As we just saw, and as Benedict affirmed, they were not.

In fact, not only did the final documents of the Council NOT embody Pope John’s vision as promulgated at the Roman Synod, according to Amerio, the papal agenda “was contradicted and negated in almost every detail.” (6) Nowhere is this more obvious than in the liturgical legislation called for by Pope John at the Roman Synod.

Later, both John Paul II and Benedict XVI, would be warriors for "Tradition." However, at Vatican II, in the sex-soaked 60's, they were both young revolutionaries - members of the "Periti" - the theological "experts" who ran Vatican II while the bishops, descendants of the Apostles, partied, drank, and signed (remember: Judas was an Apostle) wherever the Periti told them to - for much less than "30 pieces of silver."

(TO BE CONTINUED...)

THE REST OF THE STORY....PART 1....

POST: Inquiry into Guam abortion doctor continues

Guam has over 300 doctors. If not one of our local doctors will perform abortions, then what does that say? And what is the Governor NOT hearing?

Bureau of Women’s Affairs Director Jayne Flores said her office has made inquiries with various associations to find an abortion doctor to serve the island.

She said the bureau has reached out to the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League and Creating a Clinician Corp (C3). CONTINUED

MEANWHILE...ON GUAM....

http://esperansaproject.blogspot.com/search/label/Abortion%20Reports