A REALLY BAD GUY

This is great. It will renew our resolve to go after this charlatan for trafficking in bogus government documents. Here is just a partial list of Quitugua's slimy and vicious acts against the faithful of this archdiocese (links forthcoming):

1. November 21, 2011. Participated with Apuron and Alberto in the theft of the Yona property from the Archdiocese of Agana.
2. December 6, 2011. Lied to the Archdiocesan Finance Council, knowing that the Yona property had already been given to RMS. 
3. December 6, 2011. Threatened the Archdiocesan Finance Council and accused the members of a “vulnus” (trying to harm) Apuron. 
4. July 16, 2013. Wrote the letter demanding that Fr. Paul Gofigan resign as pastor of Santa Barbara and crafted the threat: “or face a more arduous and painful closure to your assignment.” 
5. July 26, 2014. Wrote and delivered the decree removing Msgr. James Benavente as Rector of the Cathedral. Refused to give Msgr. Benavente a list of the charges against him. 
6. August 3, 2014. Closed the Cathedral Museum one day after it was opened. 
7. August 4, 2014. Illegally withheld paychecks from Cathedral employees unless they signed a confidentiality agreement. 
8. August 7, 2014. Confiscated documents from the Cathedral that would have exonerated Msgr. James of the charges of financial mismanagement. 
9. December 5, 2014. Denied John Toves a meeting with Apuron and threatened to call the police if Toves visited the chancery again. 
10. January 23, 2015. Publicly trashed Msgr. James Benavente in the Cathedral parish bulletin by publishing a so-called “internal review.”
11. November 29, 2015. Published in the Umatuna a bogus certificate of title for the Yona property, perpetrating a hoax that Quitugua was originally party to. 
12. June 5, 2016. Signed the decree banning the Concerned Catholics of Guam and decreeing it a “prohibited society.” 
13. September 7, 2016. Refused entrance of LFM to RMS saying that Cardinal Filoni had instructed that “no such visit can be made to the seminary.”

You may also want to read Bob Klitzkie's September 7, 2016 letter to Archbishop Hon regarding Quitugua's slimy activities regarding the bogus certificate of title.

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY - FINAL

The saga of THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY, Apuron's sordid attempt to get a cloistered community of Carmelites nuns to LIE for him (because what he did could be seen as an ecclesial crime), has, as of Mother Dawn Marie's statement of 11/15/2016, a day which will live in infamy for The Tony, (the infamous Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron, Ofm. Cap. D.D., Metropolitan Archbishop of Agana (as he liked to sign himself) has reached its end, and I have updated the story with the BOMBSHELL conclusion for the whole world, but ESPECIALLY THE VATICAN, to see. 

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY

But the real crime and the real reason the Vatican now has to remove The Tony is what he told Mother Dawn when she confronted him about his attempt. Tony answered (paraphrase): PIUS MADE ME DO IT. 

Dear Rome. This SHOWS a bishop NOT IN CONTROL of his diocese. He is and has been for years, INCAPACITATED, and has turned the running of this diocese over to a filthy piece of putrified flesh masquerading as a Carmelite Friar and an itinerant Catechist of the Neocatechumenal Way, which harbors similar filth even in your midst. And you know it. 

MOTHER DAWN MARIE: TRUTH BOMB! NOVEMBER 15, 2016. D-DAY FOR THE KIKOS.

In April 2015, I caught Apuron red handed asking a community of Carmelite nuns to LIE for him. I exposed Apuron's vile efforts over a series of posts entitled THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY. (The full series of posts can be read here.)

Today, the facts in post were confirmed and the TRUTH was revealed about WHO the real donor was. Diana, Pius, Apuron, Adrian, David, Tricky Dick...ALL EXPOSED AS LIARS.

The audio is very poor (on the original live stream) so here are some of the details.

The donor was never a "he" nor was the donor a member of the Neocats as Pius and the others have tried to say. The donor was MOTHER DAWN MARIE. She solicited the donation from a Carmelite community in St. Louis. She had the money donated for a seminary but NEVER said anything about the money being given for RMS or the Theological Institute. 

The donation was supposed to be anonymous but Apuron blabbed that it came from the Carmelites. People thought it came from the local Carmelites which was not the case. Donations dropped off to the local Carmelites because they thought that the 2 million came from them and therefore did not need donations. The order collapsed and recently had to be dispersed to monasteries in the states, abandoning Guam after 60 years.

"They framed the letter." This was the letter Pius and Apuron sent to the Carmelites in St. Louis asking them to sign a letter saying that the money was given for the Neocats. I explain this in full at THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY. (See tab above.)

Basically, everything Apuron and the Neocats have been saying about the origin and purpose of the donation was a LIE. But then we knew that. Mother Dawn Marie could not say anything all this time because she is a cloistered nun and was not supposed to speak publicly. However, she has decided that too many people have been hurt by Apuron's lies and that the truth needed to be known.

Here's a better version of the interview:

UPDATE

KUAM just announced that there will be another press conference about the Yona Property at 1:30PM today.

HELP THE CARMELITES

Dear Friends, 

A friend of our local Carmelite monastery has advised me that the nuns are in need. The crisis that has hit our church has taken a toll on them, and most severely because Apuron blabbed about the donation which paid off the bank loan for the Yona property. 

Because the donor (stateside) was sourced through the Carmelites, people think that our local Carmelites are supporting the Neos. In fact, as you can read in THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY, Apuron tried to coerce a Carmelite superior into signing a letter stating that the nearly 2 million was given specifically to establish a Neocat seminary. As you may recall, the Carmelite superior declined to sign it, telling Apuron that she could not sign the letter because "it was not true. 

Because Apuron broke the condition of anonymity placed on the donation by the donor, our local Carmelites, who must remain silent, have been improperly discriminated against and are suffering financially. If you would like to help them, please send your contributions to:

Carmelite Monastery

PO Box 315225

Tamuning, GU 96931

DEAR DIANA....YEP, WE STOLE IT! LOL!

For the full context and the meaning of the letter below see The Ultimate Treachery. 

Dear Diana, 

I know that you mean to get to Rev & Tax sooner or later so that you can finally shut me down with an actual document and not your interpretation of a dictionary definition (LOL) or your personal unlicensed read of Guam law (LOL).

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY - THE FINAL INSTALLMENT

A full and augmented version for all four installments can be read here. A PDF of the same can be accessed here. Feel free to distribute. 

Continued from Part 3

Let's review the key points.

On November 22, 2011, Archbishop Apuron, without the approval or knowledge of the archdiocesan finance council, the college of consultors, or the Holy See, filed a Declaration of Deed Restriction with the Department of Land Management of the Government of Guam, restricting the former Accion Hotel property for the sole use of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and the Blessed Diego Institute, in perpetuity.

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY UPDATE

It was recommended that instead of updating the original post that I publish updates as separate posts for easier reading. So the previous single post THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY has been separated into three parts with each linking forward and backward to the previous or following post.

I have titled this series THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY because it is - as you will see in Part 4.

Some say all this effort is useless, that Rome isn't listening. Personally I don't care. I am only doing this because I believe it is the right thing to do. I will stop when I feel I have done all I could. I don't have to win because ultimately "vengeance is mine, says the Lord."

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY - Pt. 3

Continued from Pt. 2

Apuron and his handlers must have known that the Deed Restriction, recorded secretly with Land Management on November 22, 2011, could not be kept a secret forever.

Things were getting hot. In late 2013, I had exposed the fact that RMS was not only not forming diocesan priests as we were told it was, it was never intended to: it's Articles of Incorporation stating specifically that RMS existed to form priests according to "the life and practice of the Neocatechumenal Way" which is oriented towards breaking parishes into small communities.

Comically, Apuron admitted this was the truth by hurriedly establishing another seminary that is supposed to do what RMS said it did, but never did: form diocesan priests. But of course this second seminary was nothing but a ruse as well, and has proceeded to ruin even more lives.

Throughout 2014, through this blog, we kept the pressure on and by the end of 2014, Apuron was desperate. In addition to the millions donated by the original donor, many more millions had been raised from Guam Catholics over several years in support of the seminary for what they thought was its mission.

Once the Catholic public learned the truth about RMS, there was a backlash: a campaign to STOP THE MONEY. However, JungleWatch cannot take all the credit for the backlash. Most of the credit goes to Apuron, who, in an effort to squash us, began rabidly ordaining extremely ill-formed and unqualified presbyters from RMS, who, quite without the help of JungleWatch, proceeded to piss off the people who had been paying their way for more than a decade.

Meanwhile, JungleWatch began exposing the possibility that Apuron had violated church law by deeding the property to RMS. We did not know yet about the Deed Restriction, but there was plenty of evidence that something untoward had happened, especially the extremely ill treatment of Richard Untalan and the other members of the former finance council.

By December of 2014, Apuron must have been feeling the heat because he wrote a letter to a certain person in St. Louis stating (names are left out):

"I am writing this letter to assure you...and your very generous benefactors who will always remain anonymous* that the donation given to the Archdiocese of Agana when the former Accion Hotel in Yona, previously owned by a Japanese Company was bought by the Archdiocese of Agana in which the Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Seminary of Guam has, is and continues to be used as a seminary, but, in title belongs to the Archdiocese of Agana." 

* The reason he says the donor will remain anonymous is because the anonymity of the donor was a condition of the donation. However, Apuron had already revealed the source of the donation almost immediately after it was received, causing serious financial harm to those who had procured the donation because their regular donors believed that their donations had been abused.

First, why is Apuron writing to the benefactor (actually the benefactor's representative) TWELVE years later to assure the benefactor that the donation was used for what it was intended (the donation was given in 2002)?

Was it perhaps, like Poe's "Telltale Heart", that the secret Deed Restriction was ticking louder and louder in Apuron's conscience? After all, to cover his trail, he had viciously dismissed four people who had served him faithfully and well for many years, he had accused Mr. Untalan of "nonsense", and had sicked his sick Vicar General after him to accuse him of a "vulnus", which was a veiled threat of excommunication.

And then came JungleWatch, with exposure after exposure. The ticking got louder and louder. TICK, TICK, TICK TICK!

To be continued

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY - P. 2

Continued from Pt. 1

He needed to show that he did not alienate the property because alienation of property of that value requires the consent of both the diocesan finance council and the college of consultors. In fact, Archbishop Balvo, who at the time was the Apostolic Delegate, wrote Apuron on March 7, 2012, reminding him of this:

Regarding the matter at hand, as indicated in the various paragraphs of Canon 1292, to carry out acts of alienation, consent is required not only from the diocesan finance council but also of the college of consultors. If these do not give their consent, the diocesan bishop is not free to do as he pleases. 

According to Canon 1295, the consent of the same bodies is required in any transaction which can worse the patrimonial condition of the diocese. 

Archbishop Charles Balvo, letter to Archbishop Anthony Apuron, March 7, 2012

In addition, as per Canon 1292: "The permission of the Holy See also is required for the valid alienation of goods whose value exceeds the maximum sum." The "maximum sum" as set by the Episcopal Conference is Two Million Dollars, and of course the Yona property is worth far more than that.

Thus, if it is proven that the Deed of Restriction on the Yona property, filed by Apuron on November 22, 2011, does in fact alienate the property from the Archdiocese of Agana, then Apuron has violated church law by failing to obtain the consent of the finance council, the college of consultors, and most of all, the Holy See.

If in fact he did that then Canon 1296 prescribes the consequences:

Can. 1296 When alienation has taken place without-the prescribed canonical formalities, but is valid in civil law, the competent authority must carefully weigh all the circumstances and decide whether, and if so what, action is to be taken, namely personal or real, by whom and against whom, to vindicate the rights of the Church.

In short, since the suspect violator is the bishop himself, the competent authority is now Rome, and church law requires Rome to decide "whether, and if so, what action is to be taken...to vindicate the rights of the Church."

Before Rome can take action, however, it must be determined at the civil level whether or not alienation actually occurred. Thus, Apuron is attempting to dissuade us and Rome that it did not occur. However, the firm he hired is not licensed to render a legal opinion on a Guam transaction. So the story in the U Matuna was another attempt to play us for fools, and Rome too.

However, we will NOT be played for fools. The CCOG has hired its own Guam attorney, a specialist in real estate transactions, to render a valid opinion. More on that later, but this is why the chancery would not let him take any notes from the Denver opinion and has since hid it away from public view.

There's another angle to this that must be considered. The real issue, as Archbishop Balvo stated, is whether or not the Deed of Restriction "worsens the patrimonial condition of the diocese." This is Rome's real concern because Rome recognizes that the patrimony of a diocese is not a bishop's personal property but property to be held in trust and used for the benefit of the entire diocese.

Whether or not Apuron's deeding away control of the Yona property to a corporation separate from the Archdiocese of Agana worsened "the patrimony of the diocese" could easily be determined by simply asking whether or not the Yona property appears on the balance sheet of the Archdiocese of Agana, which is probably why Apuron refuses to post the financials of the archdiocese.

Apuron has already admitted that it does not, arguing only that he is still in control of the property and that his name is on the title. However, one doesn't have to be involved in a million dollar transaction to know that if you assign property for use by another entity, no lending institution is going to count it amongst your assets.

Continue to Pt. 3. 

THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY - Pt. 1

Archbishop Apuron hired a Denver law firm to render a favorable opinion on the status of the property currently occupied by the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and Blessed Diego Institute. He published excerpts from that opinion in the U Matuna on April 19, 2015. 

Why did Archbishop Apuron hire an expensive law firm, not licensed to practice in Guam, to do this?

Because he needed to.

Providentially, as I begin, Anonymous asks:

AnonymousApril 28, 2015 at 7:49 AM

What's to hide?

Exactly! And apparently a lot.

The U Matuna Story (The truth about the property of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary - April 19, 2015), carried the following footnote : "The whole document can be consulted at the Chancery."

Our first clue that there is something "to hide" was that the full document was not posted on the Archdiocese's website for all to see. If the document had actually exonerated Archbishop Apuron's actions, we can be sure that he would have made sure everyone of us could read every word.

By comparison, Apuron printed every word of the decision by the LA Archdiocese regarding Fr. Wadeson, enabling Apuron's reinstatement of Wadeson, in the same issue of the U Matuna. And we all know how Apuron spared no space in publishing every jot and tittle he could publish about Msgr. James. In fact, both the statement about Wadeson and the infamous Internal Review report blasting Msgr. James are both prominently featured on the archdiocesan website under "Featured Posts"!

Our second clue that there is something "to hide" was when a CCOG attorney went to the Chancery to "consult" the document and was told that not only could he not have a copy, take no pictures, and take no notes, but that he would have to stand at the counter and read the 20 page document in the presence of chancery staff.

Our third clue that there is something "to hide" is that the document is no longer available to the public. The CCOG attorney was told on April 23 that the document would only be available until 4pm on April 24. This was not what was printed in the U Matuna, so we have no choice but to believe that Archbishop Apuron really did not think anyone would come to look at it, and when someone did, he hastily made the decision to pull it.

Obviously, the document by the Denver firm DOES NOT do what Archbishop Apuron wanted it to do. But what did he want it to do and why?

First, let me preface what I am about to share with my belief that Archbishop Apuron is NOT making any of these decisions. In fact, he has not been making decisions for many years. All decisions are either made by the Gennarini-Pius hierarchy or they must be submitted to them for approval, even who will be ordained!

Also, it is already a well-known fact that Archbishop Apuron does not write any of the letters he signs, at least not the official ones. It is also quite obvious that all his sermons are either written for him or downloaded verbatim from some online source. And of course for years he has not had an original word of spiritual counsel and direction in the U Matuna, his Sunday Gospel and Reflection being lifted directly from the book 365 Days with the Lord (which at least he gives credit to).

You may think that this is being derogatory towards the archbishop. In fact, it is being merciful. While he still must take responsibility for all that is being done in his name, I believe personally that he is not in his right mind and has been co-opted and controlled by Gennarini and Pius because they need a bishop they can use for their own ends.

However, because the archbishop is the archbishop, we will still have to name him as we proceed.

So what did Apuron want the Denver law firm to do and why?

ANSWER

He needed it to show that he did not alienate the property when he recorded the Deed Restriction, restricting the property for perpetual use for use only by RMS and Blessed Diego Institute.

Why did he need to do that?

Continue to Pt. 2