THEULTIMATETREACHERYTheApuronDeception:Abishopattemptstodeceivehispope

May8,2015,Agana,GuamThe following is a consolidation of four posts related to a gross deception perpetuated by the Archbishop of Agana involving the alienation of a megamillion dollar property from the Archdiocese of Agana and the archbishop's gifting it to his friends. The original posts, posted at JungleWatch.info, assume the reader already knows the long history and complex background to what may be the final chapter to this sad saga. For our present purposes the consolidation of the story so that it may be more easily shared, the following background is provided:

BackgroundSometime in early 2015, Archbishop Apuron, the Archbishop of Agana, Guam, hired a Denver law firm to render a favorable opinion on the status of title to the property currently occupied by the Redemptoris Mater Seminary (RMS) and Blessed Diego Institute. He published excerpts from that opinion in the U Matuna, the newspaper for the Archdiocese of Agana, on April19,2015.Why did Archbishop Apuron hire an expensive law firm, not licensed to practice in Guam, to dothis?Since the January 2012 termination of the services of the four members of the archdiocesan finance council who had opposed the conveyance of title to said property to RMS, there has been much speculation and doubt as to whether or not the property (valued at as much as 75 million dollars by the archdiocesan legal counsel) was still part of the patrimony of the ArchdioceseofAgana.The Redemptoris Mater Seminary is a legally constituted Guam corporation, and legally separate from the Archdiocese of Agana. Conveyance of title to RMS would place said

Page1of11

property and its value outside the patrimony of the Archdiocese of Agana, meaning, as it is phrasedinCanon1295,the"patrimonialconditionofthediocese"wouldbe"worsened."In January of 2015, a deed restriction on said property, quietly recorded by Apuron in November of 2011, was discovered. The discovery heightened the already highly suspect status of the title to property as the deed used key language which, in Guam law, specifically denotesthealienationofproperty.If it could be proved that Archbishop Apuron had in fact alienated the 75 million dollar property from the patrimony of the Archdiocese of Agana, then he could be removed by Rome from his position as Archbishop of Agana for the flagrant disregard for church law and causing grave harmtothepatrimonialconditionofthedioceseentrustedtohiscare.Withthisbackground,letusproceed.

I.TheDenverOpinionThe 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 everyword.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 Benavente. In fact, both the statement about Wadeson and the infamous Internal Review report blasting Msgr. James are both prominently featured on thearchdiocesanwebsiteunder"FeaturedPosts"!

Page2of11

Our second clue that there is something "to hide" was when a Concerned Catholics of Guam, Inc. (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 standatthecounterandreadthe20pagedocumentinthepresenceofchancerystaff.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 lookatit,andwhensomeonedid,hehastilymadethedecisiontopullit.Obviously, the document by the Denver firm DOES NOT do what Archbishop Apuron wanted ittodo.Butwhatdidhewantittodoandwhy?

II.TheAnswerHe 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.Whydidheneedtodothat?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 March7,2012,remindinghimofthis: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 diocesanbishopisnotfreetodoashepleases.According to Canon 1295, the consent of the same bodies is required in any transactionwhichcanworsenthepatrimonialconditionofthediocese.ArchbishopCharlesBalvo,lettertoArchbishopAnthonyApuron,March7,2012

Page3of11

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 of the Pacific (CEPAC) is Two Million Dollars, and of course the subjectpropertyisworthfarmorethanthat.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 collegeofconsultors,andmostofall,theHolySee.IfinfacthedidthatthenCanon1296prescribestheconsequences:Can. 1296 When alienation has taken place withoutthe 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 personalorreal,bywhomandagainstwhom,tovindicatetherightsoftheChurch.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...tovindicatetherightsoftheChurch."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 itawayfrompublicview.There's another angle to this that must be considered. The real issue, as Archbishop Balvo stated, is whether or not the Deed Restriction "worsens the patrimonial condition of the diocese." This is Rome's real concern because Rome recognizes that the patrimony of a

Page4of11

diocese is not a bishop's personal property but property to be held in trust and used for the benefitoftheentirediocese.Whether or not Apuron's deeding away control of the subject 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 financialsofthearchdiocese.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 lendinginstitutionisgoingtocountitamongstyourassets.

III.TheTelltaleHeartApuron and his handlers must have known that the Deed Restriction, recorded secretly with LandManagementonNovember22,2011,couldnotbekeptasecretforever.Things were getting hot. In late 2013, this blog exposed the fact that Redemptoris Mater Seminary (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 towardsbreakingparishesintosmallcommunities.Comically, Apuron admitted this was the truth by hurriedly establishing another seminary (St. John Paul II Seminary in Malojloj, Guam) 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 aswell,andhasproceededtoruinevenmorelives.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 for RMS for what they thought was itsmission.

Page5of11

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 illformed and unqualified presbyters from RMS, who, quite without the help of JungleWatch, proceeded to offend and alienate 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 treatmentofMr.RichardUntalanandtheothermembersoftheformerfinancecouncil.By December of 2014, Apuron must have been feeling the heat because he wrote a letter to a certainpersoninSt.Louisstating(namesareleftout):"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 totheArchdioceseofAgana."* 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 becausetheirregulardonorsbelievedthattheirdonationshadbeenabused.

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(thedonationwasgivenin2003)?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 (the finance council) who had served him faithfully and well for many years, he had

Page6of11

accused Mr. Untalan of "nonsense", and had "sicked" his Vicar General after him to accuse himofa"vulnus",whichwasaveiledthreatofexcommunication.And then came JungleWatch, with exposure after exposure. The ticking got louder and louder. TICK,TICK,TICKTICK!

IV.ApocalypseNowLet'sreviewthekeypoints.

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 SeminaryandtheBlessedDiegoInstitute,inperpetuity.

On January 12, 2012, Archbishop Apuron terminated the service of the four members of the archdiocesan finance council who had previously voted against the conveyance of title of said propertytoRMS.

Inlate2013,JungleWatchbeganaseriesofpostsquestioningthestatusofsaidproperty.

InJanuaryof2015,theDeedRestrictionwasdiscoveredandmadepublic.

In the same month, a Vatican delegation arrived on Guam to conduct an Apostolic Visit. The former members of the finance council met with the delegation and provided them with a copy of the Deed Restriction as well as the history of the archbishop's attempt to convey the title to RMSoutrightandtheirsubsequentterminationfromthecouncilwhentheyrefusedtodoso.

JungleWatch does not know if the Visitators confronted Archbishop Apuron on the matter, or, if they did, what they advised him to do. But it seems that something happened because ArchbishopApuronsuddenlygotbusytryingtocoverhistracks.

Page7of11

On December 18, 2014, Archbishop Apuron released a statement to the press "welcoming" an upcoming "pastoral visit" from the Vatican. While it was made to appear as simply "pastoral" and as "fostering communion", it was quite clear, both from the names and positions of the people who were coming, and what they did when they actually got here, that thenatureofthevisitwasinvestigatory.Since the statement to the press was made on December 18, 2014, Archbishop Apuron, no doubt, had received word at least a day or two before. Apparently he knew he was in trouble and he wasted no time because on December 17, 2014, the day before the statement to the press,ApuronshotoffalettertoTDR*.*TDR is the acronym we will use to designate The Donor's Representative. The donor is the person or persons who anonymously gave the approximately 2 million dollars to the Archdiocese of Agana "for the purchase of a defunct hotel, for the purpose of a seminary" (exact words of the donor's note). The donor, who wanted to remain anonymous, made the donation through an intermediary whose identity we choose to protect.SowewillsimplydesignatethatpersonasTDR.

In his December 17, 2014 letter to TDR, Apuron, aware of the impending visitation from Rome,writes:

"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 wasboughtbytheArchdioceseofAganainwhichtheRedemptoris MaterArchdiocesanSeminaryofGuamhas,isandcontinuestobe usedasaseminary,but,intitlebelongstotheArchdioceseof Agana."

Obviously there is no reason for Apuron, 12 years later, to be writing TDR to assure him/her that the property still belongs to the Archdiocese of Agana...unless of course, it doesn't and heisactuallysettingupTDRforsomethingelse.

Page8of11

That"somethingelse"cameonJanuary29,2015,whenApuronagainwrotetoTDR:

"May I ask a favor...send me a letter of support for the donationmadebyyourdonorsandbenefactorstotheArchdiocese of Agana in 2003 for the purchase of the Accion Hotel for the ArchdioceseofAganaforthepurposeofhousingtheRedemptoris Mater Seminary and the Theological Institute for the formation ofpriests."

Apuron had obviously gotten spanked by the Roman visitators and now was so desperate to exonerate himself that he asked TDR to lie for him (as we shall see). In fact, he was so desperate that he not only asked TDR to lie for him, he actually wrote out the lie for him/her to sign and simply send back. We know this because in TDR's February 2, 2015 reply to Apuron,TDRwrites:

"InconclusiondearArchbishopApuron,Icannotsigntheletter youdraftedformebecauseitwouldnotbeinfacttruthful."

We are tempted to say "amazing" in relation to Apuron's audacity to ask TDR to lie for him and if you knew who TDR was you would not be just amazed, you'd be aghast! But because we have grown so used to Apuron's lies this appears to be just one more. But it is not just "one more". It is the Ultimate Treachery! We will come back to that in a minute. For now, let usreadwhatelseTDRtoldApuron:

Dear Archbishop Apuron, in 2003 when the said "funds" were donated,wehadabsolutelynoknowledgeoftheseentities(like Redemptoris Mater Seminary, the Neocatechumenal Way, or the Theological Institute for the formation of priests), not to speak of any specific intention whatsoever to relate this donation to them. In fact, we did not even know of these lay organizations, so naturally we could not direct anything to them by name. It was our sole intention to help the people of Guam to provide a property for aseminaryfortheformationof priests for the Church in Guam.Atthattime,in2003,wewere

Page9of11

made aware of the burden you were carrying in regard to the purchase of this property for a seminary.Itwasourdesireto help relieve you of this concern and enabletheArchdioceseto conductaseminaryintheformerhotel.Thiswasourintent.It was not our intent that the Archdiocese place on the hotel property, purchased with our donation, a deed restriction, in perpetuity, whereby the property is now dedicated to be used only for the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and Theological Institute.Asaresult,wefelt"veryillatease"whenwecame to know about the "Deed Restriction" which gives the Redemptoris Mater Seminary control of the said Property in "perpetuity". The phrase, "in perpetuity" implies that the seminary now belongs to the Neocatechumenal Way Christians, whichistheonlygrouppermittedtousethepropertynoworin thefuture.

Theletterthenconcludes:

Inconclusion,dearArchbishopApuron,Icannotsigntheletter your drafted for me because it would not in fact be truthful. We are keeping you, the seminarians andallthepeopleofGuam very much in our prayers. May the Spirit of love bring peace andunitytoall.SincerelyinChrist,TDR.

We have labeled this series of posts THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY because this is not just another Apuronconcocted lie. This is an attempt by Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron, Ofm,Cap.DDMetropolitanArchbishopofAganatoLIEdirectlytotheHolyFather.In 2012, Apuron had been warned by then Apostolic Delegate to Oceania, Archbishop Charles Balvo, that he was NOT free to do as he wished in the matter of this property. Church law protects the faithful from the actions of rogue and ruthless bishops by requiring, when it is a matter of harming the "patrimony" of a diocese, consent from a series of governing bodies, in this case, the archdiocesan finance council (which he fired), the college of consultors (who wereneverconsulted),andtheHolySee(whoseapprovalheneversought).

Page10of11

Apuron has bragged for months that "no can touch" him and he has scoffed and sneered at our efforts, be they blog posts, letters from the CCOG, or the now more visible public demonstrations. He felt safe in treating us this way because he knows that only the pope can removehim,andtherehastobeSERIOUSreasonforapopetoremoveabishop.Brazenly violating canon law and intentionally harming the patrimony of this diocese to the tune of tens of millions of dollars is SERIOUS reason. Thus Apuron's only hope was to get TDR to say that he/she gave him the money for RMS in the first place. And as you can see TDR did NOT go along with Apuron's vile ruse, concluding his/her reply with the words: "becauseinfactitwouldnotbetruthful."Failing this, Apuron got even more desperate which is why he got the Denver law firm to render what he tries to make look like a favorable opinion. But when the CCOG sent their attorney to look at the actual opinion, every effort was made to make it difficult for him (no notes, no copies, no pictures, and he had to stand and read the whole 20page document in the presence of chancery staff), and then it was immediately withdrawn from public inspection.I cannot release the actual copy of the letter from TDR, but Archbishop Apuron knows that everywordofthisistrue,andsodoesRome.Andtheyknowwheretogettheletter.Holy Father, Archbishop Apuron has attempted to treat you like he treats us. We suggest you findoutwhy...andsoon.TheabovewascompiledbyTimRohr,JungleWatch.info

Page11of11