Showing posts with label Archbishop Hon's Administration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Archbishop Hon's Administration. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

IT'S TIME TO FIX THIS. AND WE WILL!

Posted by Tim

All of the really hard stuff we are having to work through right now in this archdiocese is a direct consequence of the mess Archbishop Hon created. And while Hon eventually came around to the truth and began to do the right thing, he made an absolute mess of this diocese. And it is primarily because of him that the archdiocese is facing millions in law suits.

Here's why.

Saturday, October 15, 2016

THE RMS BOARD PRESS CONFERENCE, OR THE ELUCUBRATIONS OF "DR EUSEBIO".

(Posted by Frenchie)



It did not take long, after the return of the Stinking Monk to our shores, and the meeting of  convevience  of the local "leaders" of the NCW, or as I call it "the meeting of convenience", for the cadre of said NCW on the island to go on the offensive to salvage their loot.

Thursday, September 22, 2016

A STUDY IN DOUBLE TALK, AND MISLEADING PEOPLE.

(Posted by Frenchie)


While it is obvious to most people that have had the misfortune to meet our former vicar general, that he is not the brightest light on the tree; it is also obvious that what David lacks in smarts, he certainly makes up in deviousness. It is most likely one of several reasons for Pius to have selected him as the actual go-to man for the NCW while he assumes a lower profile.

Friday, September 16, 2016

IS DAVID THE DEVIOUS STILL THE VICAR GENERAL?

9:41AM is "still wondering why" Jeff was not appointed Vicar General:

The Church hierarchy has a command structure akin to the military. The Delegate to the Administrator (still wondering why Fr. Jeff was not appointed Vicar General and all appurtenances that accrue with that title)...

Here's a possible answer:

Can. 478 §1. requires that the vicar generals be priests who are "doctors or licensed in canon law or theology or at least truly expert in these disciplines." 

Obviously Fr. Jeff isn't so he can't be the vicar general.

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

HON AND JEFF - PUTTING LIPSTICK ON A PIG

Posted by Tim



At the end of Fr. Jeff's public statement yesterday regarding the account brought forward by Ramon De Plata, we read the following:


I can't help but think that the real reason the Archdiocese wants "persons who have knowledge of sexual abuse by clergy" to call them is to intercept them before they go to the media as well as to prevent even more law suits.

Friday, September 9, 2016

HON GETS KICK BACK!


Posted by Bruce Williams




Hon how does it feel to be knee deep in horse manure! First Apurun calling you a liar, then a Neo surgeon defying your authority on KUAM and now your recently appointed RMS rectum DQ'd a visit approved by Fr. Jeff by locking the gate and leaving a note. Sounds like your leadership is in question. 

We know Rome is watching! Some one's got to break the "reign of terror" that's seized the clergy and the HILL. HON you're decisions are NOT in line with your mission of unity, a charade that will result in a "painful and arduous end" to your mission as Apostolic Administrator.



The picture of the JACKASS fits the recent mountain of HEE HAWING by Eusebio & company. The rhetoric is so absurd, it is NOT amusing. The STAKES are eternal and the Parrots are oblivious to the reality that they are serving Mammon. 

Pius maybe gone, we have no evidence of that, especially after DQ's defiant and cowardly stunt. HON's decisions are, well, a "Kick in the pants". 

See you at the BBQ and on Sunday morning! St. Teresa pray for us!

Thursday, September 8, 2016

HON HIRES HIGH PRICED CALIFORNIA LAWYERS!

Jasmine Stole, Pacific Daily News, September 8, 2016, page A05

The Vatican-appointed apostolic administrator retained the legal services of two California-based lawyers in a $2 million libel and slander case filed by four people who publicly accused Archbishop Anthony Apuron of sexual assault.  Read more.

Saturday, August 6, 2016

WHAT HON NEEDS TO DO

Posted by Tim Rohr

I was wondering how long it would take for Archbishop Hon to get around to issuing an apology for the now-confessed crimes against children by Fr. Louis Brouillard (PDN story and KUAM story). Perhaps it was Bob Klitzkie's comments on K57 yesterday morning which prompted somebody to tell him that he better do something, but regardless of how it was motivated, Hon managed to get an apology out before the end of the day.

Our side, once again, runs the risk of sounding intolerant, by saying that it's not enough, but it's a risk, in the name of justice and real reconciliation, that we will take. Before I say what Hon really needs to do in this particular matter, let me say, more generally, that Hon needs to get out beyond his current circle of clergy advisors and talk to some real professionals. 


Till now, Hon's modus operandi has been to surround himself and consult with the people who have been either at the root of the problem to begin with, or who remained silent out of some misaligned view of their vow of obedience. Either way, any counsel Hon might get from clerics who are subordinate to him is risky at best and more probably tainted. 

On the matter of sex abuse, if I were Hon, I would have called Vincent Pereda immediately after his testimony on Bill 326-33 this past Monday. Mr. Pereda's credentials take up most of the first page of his testimony. There is probably no one on this island more credentialed to help Hon than Pereda. In addition, Pereda was a former sex abuse review board member for the archdiocese who resigned out of a sense of integrity for himself and his profession. He wasn't going to be used. 

If nothing else, immediately aligning with Pereda to address the sex abuse problem would have given Hon an instant air of seriousness. Instead, Hon has turned to Fr. Pat Castro and Deacon Len Stohr to be his point men on this matter; and while both good men, their first duty is not to their assignments, but to their vows. In doing this, Hon has shown us that he is not serious. For which victim in his right mind is going to ask for help from a representative of the same organization which produced and protected his perpetrator? And in the cases of Apuron and Brouillard...FOR DECADES!

It was quite clear from the outset that Hon did NOT want to deal with the sex abuse issue, and given our suspicions based on his 2015 visit and his now-demonstrated knowledge of Brouillard, may have been told NOT to touch the sex abuse issue by his Vatican handlers who are well known neocatechumenal hacks whose only care is to save RMS. Nothing else can explain the absolute absence of any mention of the sex abuse issue upon his arrival and no comment of substance until he was served with a suit. 

Hon's only hope of salvaging his mission, which is otherwise imploding, is to ask Vince Pereda (or someone who Pereda would recommend if he does not want the job) to serve as an INDEPENDENT point of contact for victims of clergy sex abuse. As a professional, victims would have the assurance from Mr. Pereda that they would not only receive or be directed to the correct kind of professional help needed, but that their confidence would be protected until such time, if they wish, to make their accounts public. 

Hon has told us that he takes this issue "seriously." Well then, here's his chance to prove it. 

Saturday, July 30, 2016

AND HON SMILES

Posted by Tim Rohr


As you have seen from my activity in the news, Tim Rohr has not "gone away." And while I have turned over the administration of this blog to others and opened it up to some wonderful authors, I will still use it when necessary. And today it is necessary.




Archbishop Hon is apparently on a media blitz. Unfortunately, it appears we can trust him no more than Apuron and Adrian. 


KUAM: "The archdiocese owns that property. No doubt of it. And then there's a certain ambiguity who has the right to use it. And on this matter, I'm going to have a review of it," Archbishop Hon stated.

Archbishop Hon KNOWS this is NOT true. In January of 2015, Richard Untalan and Joseph Rivera, who were both fired by Apuron from his finance council for opposing the transfer of the property, met personally with Hon and explained that the recently discovered Declaration of Deed Restriction, recorded at Land Management on November 22, 2011, conveyed title to the property to RMS, a corporation wholly separate from the Archdiocese of Agana and controlled ultimately by the Board of Guarantors which itself is 75% controlled by the two Gennarini's and Angelo Poschetti, the Neocatechumenal Responsible Team for the United States. 

In May of 2015, a copy of the Legal Opinion by real estate attorney Jacques Bronze, was forwarded to Hon's office. The Legal Opinion demonstrated in great detail that the document executed by Apuron and recorded at Land Management: “operates to transfer a present interest and is an absolute conveyance in fee simple, of the subject real property to RMHF, divesting all right, title and interest of the subject property from the Grantor, except for the subject restraint in use.”

Hon is publicly misleading Guam's Catholics and we must believe, given that Hon was advised as just stated, that he is doing this purposely. 

Sadly, all of this would have been legally cleared in court had the Attorney General NOT intervened in the legal process required by law by "working something out" with "the trained lawyer." 

After Msgr. David C. Quitugua, on November 29, 2015, published in the Umatuna a false copy of the certificate of title to the property previously obtained from Land Management by Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje (aka "the trained lawyer"), Attorney Robert Klitzkie directly engaged the Director of Land Management, Michael Borja about the false certificate.

Borja agreed that the certificate published by Msgr. David C. Quitugua in the Umatuna was in error and initially set out to take corrective action prescribed by law which would have required the issue to be brought before the Superior Court. However, Borja soon aborted that prescription and defaulted to something being "worked out" between Deputy Attorney General, Kristin Finney and Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje. 

This route not only kept the matter from going before the court where the truth would have been revealed about the title, but it was a shameful abuse of the law by those elected and appointed to uphold it. The whole ugly story can be found in this series of posts. 

Let's look at some of Hon's other "misleading" statements in this interview:

KUAM: Hon tells KUAM News he continues to reach out to the alleged victims. 

Hon has NOT called a single one of them. And if he really was sincere about this, he would have at least invited Roland Sondia to his July 27 press conference. Roland lives on Guam and works right across the street at the PDN. But Hon did not invite Roland nor did he "reach out" to any of them by phone, letter, email, whatever. Perhaps he thinks that because he appointed Fr. Pat Castro to be a liaison to the victims, whatever that means, that he has "reached out." If so, then that is very telling of what kind of "priest" Hon really is. 

KUAM: He also clarifies he wasn't aware he was in the presence of one of the alleged victims who was picketing outside the Hagatna Cathedral moments before Sunday morning mass. "Unfortunately at that time I did not notice the presence of Mr. Walter Denton, so I did not ignore him.

What is sad is that Denton had been all over the news media for several days before this happened. Walter should not have had to try to approach Hon on the steps of the Cathedral. He should have immediately received a call from Hon when he came forward about his being raped by Apuron several days earlier, in fact the day after Hon arrived on Guam. There was no such call, no attempt to "reach out" to Walter, leaving Walter no alternative but to try to "reach out" to Hon on the street. 

KUAM: According to the $2 million dollar libel and slander suit against the archdiocese and Apuron, plaintiffs allege such statements were prepared and released by Father Edvilado Olivieras. According to Hon, there's no proof Father Edivaldo was ever appointed the church's official spokesperson.

And how would we know there is "no proof"? Are we supposed to believe the man who just told us that the Yona property belongs to the archdiocese and that he has "reached out" to the victims? The statement, though, really shows Hon's incompetence. "Proof" that Edivaldo was appointed spokesman is NOT needed. The fact that Edivaldo declared that he WAS the spokesman, and the fact that Edivaldo ACTED in that capacity, doing so on the Archbishop's letterhead, is all the "proof" Attorney David Lujan needed to include Edivaldo in the amended complaint. And if Hon is not careful, he will soon find himself a defendant.

Now here is the real "whopper!" 

KUAM: Hon confirms he's met with representatives of the Concerned Catholics of Guam.

Hon did in fact "meet" with two representatives of the CCOG: Greg Perez and Robert Klitzkie. After keeping them waiting for twenty minutes past their appointment time, according to Klitzkie, Hon opened the meeting with "is there something you want to tell me?" Klitzkie read a list of concerns and per Klitzkie's report, Hon had nothing to say other than to quibble with Klitzkie's referring to Apuron's "victims" as "victims" (Hon doesn't like that word), and then to say good-bye. 

Perez and Klitzkie did not ask for the appointment. Hon did. And Perez and Klitzkie agreed to meet with Hon in good faith, believing he was interested in having a discussion. Instead, Hon was only interested in checking the CCOG off his list so he could later say - as he does in this interview - that he had "met with representatives of the Concerned Catholics of Guam." 

And here is another FALSE story:

Father Paul Gofigan and Monsignor James Benavente both restored

To be clear: NEITHER PRIEST WAS RESTORED, because, as you will see, neither priest will be "restored" to the positions from which they were removed. In the case of Msgr. James, it is clear what is happening:

KUAM: Monsignor Benavente said, "What Archbishop Hon did was he retracted the statements that was made about me, the malicious statements maligning my name, and he's basically retracted that. And more importantly is that he's according me the opportunity to have due process, which was never given to me.

In short, Msgr. James was NOT cleared of Apuron's charges against him which led to his being removed as rector of the Cathedral, Director of Catholic Cemeteries, and Director of the Archdiocesan Development Group. All Hon did was retract the statements Apuron later released about him to the press. In fact, Hon apparently thinks Msgr. James is still guilty because by according him "due process," he essentially is saying "Okay, I'll give you an opportunity to stand trial." Msgr. James must now defend himself to Hon, but given Hon's already demonstrated penchant for ignoring facts...well, good luck to Msgr. James.

As for Fr. Paul, unfortunately he slapped the faces of those who have stood up for him these past three years by changing the meaning of the word "restore." For those who have been standing in the streets with signs reading RESTORE, "restore" meant to restore both priests to the positions from which they were wrongly removed. 

This is especially true with Fr. Paul, whose canonical rights were clearly violated by Apuron's appointment of Fr. Dan Bien as Parochial Administrator to Santa Barbara parish in July of 2013, automatically eliminating Fr. Paul from his position as pastor. Apuron's actions clearly violated canon law, as both Fr. Paul's canon lawyer later clearly outlined, and as Apuron himself de facto admitted by commencing the correct canonical process which led to the official Decree of Removal issued several months later, a decree, Hon says does not exist. 

At the press conference on July 27, Fr. Paul tells us that his version of "restore" only means to "restore" his name, which Fr. Paul believes Hon did by saying that Fr. Paul engaged in no "formal" act of disobedience." Fr. Paul is welcome to accept what ever olive branch (or fig leaf) Hon wants to give him, but this remains a slap in the face to those who have labored so long in his behalf. By not restoring Fr. Paul to his position as pastor of Santa Barbara, Hon leaves in place Apuron's Decree of Removal, which while canonically confected, remains based on the act of "formal disobedience" that Hon says Fr. Paul did not commit. 

Additionally, Hon's words are deceptive. His use of of the adjective "formal" is not by chance. In Catholic moral teaching there is both "formal" and "material" participation in an act. An example: The direct procurement or performance of an abortion is "formal participation in evil." Driving someone to the clinic to get an abortion is "material participation." Hon, while saying Gofigan is not guilty of "formal disobedience" is leaving in place the fact that he believes Gofigan is guilty of "material disobedience," which is why Gofigan will NOT be restored to his position as pastor of Santa Barbara. The material disobedience is Hon's view that Gofigan acted badly in publicly opposing Apuron over his mistreatment. So Hon has to punish Gofigan. 

This has nothing to do now with what Fr. Paul and Msgr. James themselves are satisfied with. This has to do with the truth. For us who have labored so long in their behalf, RESTORE meant more than just the restoration to their positions, it meant the complete rejection of all that Apuron both said and did by canceling not only Apuron's words, but also his acts. Hon has retracted Apuron's words, but has left his acts in place, which is why neither priest will be "restored."

Once again, this is not about what either priest will settle for or make them happy. This is about TRUTH. And once again, as with Apuron, Quitugua, Adrian, Pius, Edivaldo and the whole smelly lot, Hon is doing as they did...albeit, with a smile. 




Friday, July 29, 2016

UPDATE ON THE BACKROOM POLITICS AT THE CHANCERY, OR LEARNING HOW TO DANCE ALL OVER AGAIN.


Posted by Frenchie.



As we have seen recently, there is a lot of jockeying around at the Chancery the last few weeks.

This a different kind of dance, and all the players have not really learned or understood the rules.

Archbishop Hon is an adept and talented practitioner of the Roman equivalent of the Potomac two steps, practiced by our politicians in DC, we shall call it the Tiber two steps. You put one foot forward and back up twice, and so on.

The main Choreographer is this man:
He does not look like much, his English is hard to understand, and people have a tendency to underestimate his moves.
Yet he is an expert dancer.

Thursday, July 28, 2016

ALERT TO ALL THE MAMAMKO! WE ARE GETTING HELP FROM THE CHURCH LADY!!!STOP ALL THE PRESSES.....

Posted by Frenchie.

I was approached by world famous "Church Lady" who asked me about Archbishop HON.

After I explained a little bit the issues we had with the Archbishop from Hong Kong, and his latest "Press conference" she declared:


Yes Ladies and Gentlemen, we will get some help from our friend  in our fight.

As you have all seen, Archbishop Hon gave us a demonstration of what the European call the "wooden tongue" which loosely translated amounts to double talk.

Sunday, July 10, 2016

HON??


Click here to view more photos of today's picket.

NOTE TO HON: AS THE CHURCH GOES SO GOES THE WORLD.

To date, the Chancery Office of the Archdiocese of Agana, now headed by Archbishop Savio Hon Tai-Fai, has threatened legal action against the laity at least SIX TIMES. (Actually there are several more but this is all I had time for to pull up out of my files.)

NOVEMBER 28, 2014: "...defending the Church compels me to file a suit for defamation." 
-Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron. Statement re allegations by John C. Toves

NOVEMBER 30, 2014: "...defending the Church compels me to file a suit for defamation." 
- Anthony S. Apuron. November 30, 2014. Sunday homily at Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament Fiesta Mass

DECEMBER 05, 2014: "...you are hereby notified that any demands for an appointment or attempts to…confront the Archbishop on Chancery grounds or elsewhere will be responded to appropriately and in accordance with the law." 
- Msgr. David C. Quitugua, Vicar General Archdiocese of Agana, to John C. Toves, threatening to call the police on Toves

JULY 5, 2015: "If you do not comply with this demand, Archbishop Apuron will have to pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking monetary damages for harm to his reputation and character, punitive damages, injunctive relief and an order that you pay court costs and attorney's fees. Your liability and exposure under such legal action will be considerable."
- Michelle R. Neal. Attorney for Anthony S. Apuron. Letter addressed to John Toves. 

MAY 13, 2016: "...the Archdiocese of Agana is in the process of taking canonical measures with the Sacra Rota – the competent canonical tribunal – and filing civil lawsuit against those perpetrating these malicious lies." 
- Fr. Edivaldo da Silva Oliveira. Archdiocese of Agana, Media Relations. Media Release threatening CCOG and Tim Rohr

MAY 31, 2016: "...the Archdiocese of Agana is in the process of taking canonical and legal measures against those perpetrating these malicious lies."
- Fr. Edivaldo da Silva Oliveira. Archdiocese of Agana, Media Relations. Media Release threatening Doris Concepcion and Tim Rohr

Yet, in today's Archdiocesan newspaper, Archbishop Savio Hon Tai-Fai, Apostolic Administrator for this same archdiocese, presumes to lecture us on how it is "Modern societies" which have "sharpened the tools of the law" and have led us to the "belief that wrongdoings can be solved simply by lawsuits..." 



Hon's words are so typical of a church bureaucrat steeped in clericalism and infatuated with his own power: blame the people, blame the laity, blame "modern society" blame the world. 

The civil case filed by Lujan and Wolff in behalf of Quintanilla, Concepcion, Denton, and Sondia, was the FIRST and only action by any member of the laity to respond with these so-called "sharpened tools" to the multiple threats coming from Hon's own chancery. 

As the Church goes, so goes the world, Hon. And here you have led by example. By not condemning the actions and accusations against the laity by members of the clergy over whom (as you say) you have "the power," you align yourself with them and their threats. 

You're a fake, Hon. A FAKE. 

Sunday, July 3, 2016

NO WORDS. SMH.

A report from last night's "prayer meeting."


  1. Went to the prayer service last night. Prayers that were selected seem to set the stage for a Neo brainwashing convivence, "Your word, O Lord, is the lantern to light our way." Hon says Guam culture expects everything fast, and that we do not determine the pace of God. Yeah, right. God made the whole world in six days, and Hon's been here for three weeks now and very little has been done to de-Apuronize our Church. Hon is here to carry out what he said last year. His mission's priority is unity. Well, so far he has not done well. Hon tells us to remember our common desire: Be One with the Lord. Also to deepen our faith in our Bishop. What? A pedophile? Is Hon serious? Then Hon appears to apologize to the Clergy saying that his request for their resignation was not intended to disrupt the diocese (The Presbyters must have registered a complaint). Hon also tells the Clergy, "You may have the knowledge; but I have the power." Continuing, he says that unity is not fast food. I was not impressed or convinced that he will improve the situation. Hon, reach out to Apuron's victims, return the Yona property, restore our priests, defrock Apuron, remove Presbyters from our parishes (or get them better trained), and de-Apuronize the Church (includes Cristobal, Quitugua, Pius, Uduvaldo, and cohorts). Then maybe, we will be convinced that you have the power are to foster unity. We're moving fast. Civil court in a few weeks, criminal court in a few months, and restoration of our Church in a few years. Catch up if you can.
Remember these. I'll come back to them:

  • Hon says Guam culture expects everything fast, and that we do not determine the pace of God.
  • His mission's priority is unity.
  • Hon tells us to remember our common desire: Be One with the Lord.
  • Also to deepen our faith in our Bishop
  • Hon also tells the Clergy, "You may have the knowledge; but I have the power." 
  • Continuing, he says that unity is not fast food. 

If Hon really did say these things then it's time to change our signs. I'll be back.

THE REIGN OF TERROR STILL REIGNS


On Friday, Bob Klitzkie was on the phone with Patti Arroyo (K57) attempting to explain the very real challenges we still face, when a woman called up and lectured Bob on why he should just shut up and be "joyful." She might as well have been Anthony S. Apuron calling because I'm sure he'd like nothing more. 

From the beginning, our only weapon against this all powerful enemy has been public outrage. And we would be stupid to stop now. For what have we accomplished?
  • Anthony S. Apuron is still Archbishop of Agana and according to his Vatican video, not only is he still in charge, the apostolic administrator is only here at his request, mere hired help. 
  • Since Hon has never refuted Apuron's message we are left with no other option than to believe it to be true. 
  • Deacon For Sure For Sure is still the SARC. 
  • Fr. Pat Castro's appointment as some sort of liaison means nothing, especially since he is not on Guam during this most critical time. 
  • Fr. Paul and Msgr. James are still outcasts. And even if Hon won't restore them to their positions he has complete authority to publicly condemn how they were treated. He hasn't. 
  • The decree against the CCOG was rescinded but only after Hon allowed it to go into effect and without a word of apology to the CCOG for Apuron's violation of our rights as Catholics. 
  • The gag order on Deacon Martinez was rescinded but not a word of condemnation or apology about Apuron's attempt to shut up the one member of the clergy willing to speak up against the policy which permitted Apuron to hide.  
  • The Yona property remains completely in the hands of the Gennarini's. 
  • RMS is still in full swing. 
  • This past Friday was the first time I know of that Hon met with any of the disaffected laity and there might as well have been no meeting at all. 
  • Apuron's four sex abuse victims, even if they are "alleged" have NOT been contacted by Hon or anyone else. 
  • Hon's failure to condemn Apuron's publicly calling them LIARS, and even his own intimation that the "alleged" victims accounts may not be true, now makes Apuron's slander and libel, Hon's. 
  • The neocats still continue with their illicit liturgy. 
  • The Cathedral is still firmly in neo-control. 
  • Apuron is free to roam the world and plans to meet up with the neo-cats at World Youth Day. 
  • David and Adrian might have been moved but only temporarily. Yesterday Adrian sent out an email letting us all know that Fr. Lito is only the chancellor "for the time being," meaning that soon all will be restored to how it was before with Apuron's triumphal return:

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Adrian Cristobal
Hello:

Effective 30 June 2016, Rev. Fr. Jose Antonio Abad was appointed as Chancellor of the Archdiocese.  
For the time being, and for matters related to the Archdiocese of Agana and the Chancery Office, kindly email Fr. Abad at  <blsdiego@yahoo.com>.  

Should this be a personal matter, please forward your email to me at <cristobal.adrian@gmail.com>.

Thank you and God bless.
Fr. Adrian Cristobal

Hon has been here nearly a month and has spent much of that time interviewing the clergy and religious, but what for? With Apuron's return imminent and David and Adrian's titles removed only "for the time being," which member of the clergy or religious is going to speak up about the real issues? And the same goes for his ad hoc committees. A whole month wasted and the "reign of terror" still reigns. 

Be Joyful? Not only NO, but HELL NO!

If the Apostolic Administrator is sincere about "unity," here are SIX things that he can do which will address the essential causes of disunity, SIX things which he has complete authority to do and will not take any time or research since he already knows the facts about each of these:
  1. Publicly repudiate Apuron's Vatican video message.
  2. Publicly repudiate the way Fr. Paul and Msgr. James were treated.
  3. Publicly acknowledge that Apuron had no authority to transfer the Yona property to RMS.
  4. Publicly condemn clergy sex abuse and show that he is serious by placing his own ads (if only in the Umatuna) calling for other victims to come forward - and assuring them they will not be called liars (at least!). 
  5. Publicly extend a hand to the four victims (even if they are only "alleged") who have come forward and offer the Church's help. 
  6. Publicly apologize for Apuron's mistreatment of the lay Catholic faithful by threatening all of us with his decree against the CCOG and anyone having anything to do with their cause. 
Until Hon at least begins to show some care for JUSTICE then there will be NO peace, no unity, and his prayer services will remain not only a waste of time but an affront to the aggrieved and a spiritual fraud. 

Friday, July 1, 2016

COURTESY RESIGNATIONS

We've heard that Archbishop Hon has asked for courtesy resignations from all clergy in all positions. Will Archbishop Hon be asking for the courtesy resignation of the pastor for the Cathedral?


Thursday, June 30, 2016

THE FIRST ISSUE. LET'S FIX THIS NOW!

We are willing to give Archbishop Hon a point or two for at least getting the names David C. Quitugua and Adrian Cristobal out of our faces. I have some ideas about their replacements which I will share later - and granted, I realize that probably neither of them wanted these jobs. 

So for now, let's move on to the next issue, which should have been the FIRST issue (after extending a personal helping and welcoming embrace to the sex abuse survivors - alleged or otherwise, which of course did not happen.) 

The FIRST issue is the status of Fr. Paul Gofigan and Msgr. James Benavente. It is the FIRST issue because it was the treatment of these two priests by Apuron, David, and Adrian which was the catalyst for the explosion that followed.

It is also the issue that Archbishop Hon has had the most time to deal with as well as the authority to do something about. Both cases were known to Hon in his capacity as Secretary to the "competent congregation" for at least a year and half. That NOTHING was done regarding either case before Hon arrived here is telling. That NOTHING has been done SINCE Hon arrived here is even more telling. 

When I say "nothing has been done," I don't mean poking the issue and floating proposals for a possible resolution. I mean: 
  1. a clear and public condemnation of how these two priests were treated by Apuron, David, and Adrian, and 
  2. an immediate restoration of the two priests to their positions. 

Let me explain.

1. Hon must PUBLICLY condemn the actions of Apuron, David and Adrian against Fr. Paul and Msgr. James because these two priests were themselves PUBLICLY condemned by Apuron, David and Adrian. 

2. Both MUST be restored to the previous positions, Fr. Paul as pastor of Santa Barbara and Msgr. James as Rector of the Cathedral and Pastor of the Cathedral Parish (he was both), because both were removed in a manner that was canonically illegal. 

In Fr. Paul's case, he was illegal replaced by a parochial administrator without first being removed according to the canonical provisions for the removal of pastors. In Msgr. James' case, he was removed without being afforded his canonical right to due process to address the accusations Apuron made against him. 

The key word is "removed." Neither priest was transferred. Both were suddenly and abruptly REMOVED. Neither priest was offered a different assignment. Both were assigned later to St. Anthony only after the expression of public outrage.

Given that both priests had their canonical rights violated, Archbishop Hon, in the name of justice and unity, MUST condemn Apuron's illegal acts against them and restore them to their positions.

Once that is done, Hon can then ask for their courtesy resignation, which (I've heard) he is asking of everyone, and they can be reassigned as he sees fit. 

The Cathedral

However, one thing must be clear, the NEO's are NOT to hang on to the Cathedral. The Cathedral MUST be the seat of unity. The NEO's, who only represent a tiny percentage of the diocese, should not be permitted to occupy the "seat of unity." 

What's more, it is EXTREMELY CLEAR that their "eucharist" is so dissimilar to our Catholic Mass, that the NEO celebration of their "eucharist" in our Cathedral is a shot through the heart of any attempt at Catholic unity. 

The Neo Communion Rite

And as long as we are on that subject it is time for Archbishop Hon to either show us the document permitting the NEO's communion rite or publicly prohibit it. To review, there are two elements of the communion rite which do not conform to the liturgical books nor are they permitted in the NCW statute:

1. The priest delays his communion until the sacred species has first been distributed to the communicants. (The liturgical books require the priest to first consume the sacred species, and THEN distribute Holy Communion.)

2. The neo-communicants "receive" the consecrated bread* in their hands but do not immediately consume as required by the liturgical books. They return to their seats, consecrated bread in hand, and then consume upon receiving a signal from the celebrant. 

* We are not sure if the bread is actually consecrated since from what we can tell, the Neo belief is that Jesus was a sinner and thus not God. But we will address that another time.

You could say that this manner of receiving communion is GROUND ZERO for the heartache in this diocese as this is the practice Apuron openly defended during his infamous 2006 KOLG radio tirade. Hon MUST either show us the document permitting this practice or must officially and publicly prohibit it. 

Okay? Ready, set, go!

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

DEAR ARCHBISHOP HON. THERE'S SOMEONE MISSING.

I noticed something funny about the 2016 Directory showing the names of incardinated priests away from the archdiocese.


There is a name missing. A certain Fr. Louis Brouillard. Perhaps you don't know him. His name turned up recently in 2013 after the Diocese of Duluth, Minnesota, was forced to turn over secret documents regarding clergy sex abuse. 


As you can see, as late as 2013, he is listed as a Priest of the Diocese of Agana. It says "diocese" because Agana was not yet an Archdiocese when Brouillard was removed from ministry here in Guam, probably around 1981, and sent to Duluth. 

And as you can also see from this 2005 document, Apuron has kept him on our diocesan payroll:


Before I get to the real point of this post, you probably already noticed the discrepancy: I am estimating that Brouillard was removed from Guam in 1981 (because that's when he shows up in Duluth) and Apuron's 2005 list says he left Guam in 1972. 

I think I'm right because on July 5, 2013, the Umatuna ran a feature article about the 40th anniversary of San Isidro parish, established in 1973, and noted that Brouillard was its first pastor:

Hmmmm. Now why would Apuron want us to think that Brouillard was already gone by 1972? 

Perhaps it has something to do with the real meat of this post which is: Why is Brouillard still a priest of the "Diocese of Agana" (meaning he's still on our payroll)  in 2013, when he was removed from ministry nearly thirty years previously and by the diocese we apparently squirreled him off to? ((I guess Qatar and Ballin weren't available back then.)

Perhaps you are asking why he was "squirreled away" out of Agana in the first place. Well, we've been collecting the stories, and they are pretty horrific. Don't worry, you'll hear about them in time. We're being careful with this. At least one of his victims has already met with a local attorney, and from what I have learned, there are many more. 

So here's the deal. Brouillard was never laicized even though he was removed from ministry in Guam. And then, apparently because he kept up his molesting ways, was removed from ministry again in the diocese we sent him to. Why wasn't he laicized? "Defrocked?" Why is Apuron still paying him? Could it be that Brouillard knows about Apuron and Apuron knows about Brouillard? You think? 

If Brouillard was made pastor of San Isidro in 1973, and from the Duluth records, not moved there till 1981, then he would have been here during the late 70's when Apuron was "allegedly" helping himself to the bodies of little boys. 

You know, you gotta wonder how someone like Apuron with this horrible history, could have been made a bishop. Guam is too small for Apuron's sickening sex spree not to be known. We know from Walter Denton's testimony that at least one priest knew, and it is quite possible that several priests knew, including Brouillard and maybe a few others that are still around. (Guess who?) 

Apuron was made a bishop in 1984. Brouillard had already gone off to Duluth to molest white boys (instead of brown ones). Brouillard was removed from ministry in Duluth in 1985. From 1981 to 1985, since he was active in ministry in Duluth, it would be expected that he was paid by Duluth. But once he was removed from ministry in 1985, the responsibility for his welfare reverted back to the the diocese where he is incardinated: Agana. 

Apuron was made Archbishop in 1986 upon the death of Archbishop Flores. Could it be that Apuron made a deal with Brouillard to take care of him as long as he kept his mouth shut? After all, one word from Brouillard and Apuron would have been quickly toppled from his episcopal chair which he had barely yet warmed. I think there may have been a few other deals made like that as well. (Guess who?)

Archbishop Hon, this is not going to go away. There are many boys (now men in their 60's) who know the name Brouillard and I have heard the most awful, unbelievable stories. Oh, and he was a scoutmaster. GEEZ!!! And you are not going to believe what he made those boys do on their camping trips. It wasn't tying square knots - at least not with ropes. 

Apuron had to know all this, but we'll wait for our court date for all that to come out. You know, under penalty of perjury and all that. Meanwhile, Brouillard's name needs to go back in the directory. He's still alive, you know. In fact, he recently just had a visitor. (I have the picture.) Courage. 

****

P.S. Let this post serve as an ad for anyone who was molested or otherwise sexually used or abused by Louis Brouillard. Contact me at junglewatch.info@gmail.com and I'll send you to the attorney who can assist you. This is where that INSTITUTIONAL LIABILITY is going to kick in. Too bad, Archbishop Hon. If only you would have done the right thing to begin with. You didn't.