THANK YOU TO WHOEVER MADE THIS

 

WHAT HAPPENED?

By Tim Rohr

At 23:00 in this video, Archbishop Jimenez begins his homily. After a few minutes, he begins to describe what happened to Fr. Mike.  The Mass took place on January 2, 2026, the day Fr. Mike died. 

Archbishop Jimenez describes Fr. Mike's arrival at the clergy Christmas party "last Tuesday,"which would have been December 30, 2025. The party was at the social hall in Maina. Jimenez says that Fr. Mike left the party early and then sent him a text saying that he wasn't feeling well. 

The next day, December 31, 2025, Jimenez published the News Release advising that Fr. Mike had been hospitalized that morning. 

This is relevant given that a certain "Anonymous" appears to be adamant in inferring that Fr. Mike, after being assigned to St. Joseph in Inarajan, continued to reside at St. Anthony's, and thus experienced no particular hardship in accessing medical care:

AnonymousJanuary 3, 2026 at 6:05 PM

Pale' Mike was still living at the St. Anthony rectory.

"Antonio" attempted to clarify:

AntonioJanuary 3, 2026 at 8:25 PM

This was only the case for the first few weeks after the reshuffling of priests, as his soon-to-be living space in Inarajan was still being prepared. Later on, yes, he would occasionally stop by St. Anthony Church and even stay for brief periods there whenever he was asked to either cover masses or undergo grueling dialysis treatment.

However, Anonymous insisted:

AnonymousJanuary 4, 2026 at 1:14 PM

He lived at St Anthony rectory, which can house 8 priests. He was stricken in his bedroom there. Fact.

Anonymous appears to be a member of the clergy who had no "love" for Fr. Mike, or at least someone close to a member of the clergy who is vested in running interference for the reason Fr. Mike was assigned to a parish the furthest away from the critical medical care he needed.

From how Archbishop Jimenez describes it, it appears that Fr. Mike, upon leaving the Christmas party on December 30, knew he wouldn't make it to Inarajan and decided to stay the night at St. Anthony, which is why he "was stricken in his bedroom there," as Anonymous reports.

DAMAGE CONTROL?

By Tim Rohr

“…we ask everyone to please refrain from circulating rumors and unofficial, unfounded information.” - Archbishop Ryan Jimenez

PDF

Strange words from Archbishop Jimenez tacked on to the announcement regarding Fr. Mike Crisostomo's hospitalization a couple days ago.

And now, now that Fr. Mike is dead, those words are stranger still.

What "rumors and unofficial, unfounded information" could have been "circulating," and apparently in such a heightened way that the archbishop felt moved to warn everyone to stop it? 

Fr. Mike had been ill for a very long time. He had been visibly wasting away before all of us. He was, according to what he told me personally two years ago, receiving dialysis treatment 3 days a week for 3.5 hours each day.  I believe that as his disease got worse, he required even more frequent dialysis. He also was having trouble with his fistula - the access point on his arm for his dialysis. 

Strokes are not uncommon for people who suffer with diabetes, and it came as no surprise when I heard that Fr. Mike had one. But the archbishop's words WERE a surprise: "...please refrain from circulating rumors and unofficial, unfounded information." It sounds like the archbishop is afraid of something. Damage control?

Now, compare Fr. Mike's death to the death of another priest which in fact did very much warrant the circulation of rumors and unofficial information: the death of Fr. Fr Antonino Caminiti almost exactly one year ago (Dec. 14, 2024). 

The reason Fr. "Nino's" death warranted rumors isn't hard to guess at: he had been accused of sexual misconduct with a parishioner, he had been removed from the parish by Archbishop Jimenez, and he died while in the "custody" of the same archbishop.  

YET! There was NOTHING from the archbishop about the sudden and mysterious death of Fr. Antonio Caminiti other than the usual announcements about services and burial - not even a mention about the cause of death.

Additionally, pursuant to the archbishop's letter of Nov. 12, 2024, Fr. Nino was under investigation: “...the preliminary investigation was conducted and the allegation is now under further investigation as recommended by the Independent Review Board."

Has anyone heard a peep about this investigation in what is now more than one year? Nothing, as far as I know. Just because the accused is dead doesn't mean the investigation should die too. But apparently it did. 

If in fact, Fr. Nino engaged in sexual misconduct with a parishioner, this should be known. And if he didn't, then his name should be cleared. 

In the exposition of the horrible scandal this diocese has had to suffer through for ten years now, there were several dead priests who were "on trial." Just because they were dead was no cause for sudden silence about the allegations against them - as it appears to be in the Caminiti case. 

But NOTHING. (But then again, Caminiti was a Neo.)

Meanwhile, Fr. Mike, who, as already mentioned, was very visibly ill for the last several years, has a stroke and the archbishop jumps out to do what can only be characterized as DAMAGE CONTROL.

Why? 

P.S. Note that the NEWS RELEASE is not signed by anyone and only says "sent by Tony Diaz." That's exceptionally bad form. This is what the goons who ran the asylum for Apuron did: just sent out all kinds of stuff on archdiocesan letterhead but from no one. We're not going to let that go. If it's on the letterhead then it's from the archbishop. Period.

THEN AND NOW

 

APPARENTLY SHE'D RATHER FIGHT WITH DOUG

 By Tim Rohr

Note: This post is about abortion, the slaughter of the innocents. And lest anyone think such a post is out of context for the Christmas Season, today, December 28, is the Feast of the Holy Innocents, the first martyrs, slaughtered by a governor.

"Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of Guam has decided that the ban has no force or effect because it was repealed by implication through subsequent laws that allow for and regulate abortion on island." - O'Connor, J. (2025, Dec. 19). Governor opposes rehearing for AG appeal in abortion ban injunction case. Guam Daily Post

As the main mover behind those aforesaid "subsequent laws" which the Guam Supreme Court used to justify its repeal of Guam's "old abortion ban" by implication, I have a few thoughts to share about the current motion for a rehearing on the matter. 

Going back to 1990, when Guam's "old abortion ban" (P.L. 20-134) was first signed into law, or even back to 1989 when it was introduced, then following it through all the recent court battles, I believe it's fair to estimate that this legislation has cost the Government of Guam (i.e. "us") many millions of dollars, and it appears that the battle will continue and so will the dollars.

While I support the AG's attempts to exhaust every last avenue to do what he was elected to do (enforce the laws of Guam), I have to wonder about the Governor's real motivation in keeping this fight alive.

Rather than carry on this multi-million dollar slug-fest, the Governor, who has the authority to introduce legislation (via the Rules Committee), could simply submit a one sentence bill calling for the repeal of P.L 20-134 and all of its effects - or something like that. 

Of course any member of the Legislature can do this too, but - probably because they're afraid to touch it - no one - for 35 years now, has done so. 

So the real "ball" (or in this case, "the baby") is in the Governor's court. The AG has no authority to repeal the law. His only authority (and his job) is to enforce the law. So if the Governor doesn't want the AG to pursue the matter, then it is really up to her to repeal the law and stop the nonsense. 

But she hasn't, and she probably won't. She seems to want the 1990 injunction to remain enshrined into Guam law as a monument to herself - since she was instrumental in getting Guam's "old abortion ban" enjoined back in 1990 - an act which ultimately led to the deaths of thousands and thousands of mostly CHamoru children.

Note: 2008 was the first year, thanks to The Epseransa Project, that the abortion reporting law was enforced. 2018 was the last year an abortionist publicly practiced in Guam. LINK

So like so many things she has done since coming to office, she wastes and wastes...

But back to the Supreme Court and the "repealed by implication" thing. As the aforesaid main mover of the four laws that led to the Court's decision, I had filed an amicus brief (here and here) in the case. My argument was that since Roe was still the law of the land, any attempt to outright ban abortion at the time would have never even made it to a filing let alone a vote. 

There was no option, in those days, other than to regulate abortion pursuant to what was already precedent. Thus we introduced, passed, and enacted: 1) a ban on partial-birth abortion; 2) a requirement for parental consent for abortion for minors; 3) a requirement for informed consent for abortion; and 4) an expanded abortion reporting law. (The Esperansa Project backed a total of 8 abortion-regulating bills into law.)

All four of those laws did not ban abortion because they could not, but limited and regulated it where they could. Thus for the Guam Supreme Court to opine that those four laws "repealed" P.L.-134 "by implication," in my mind anyway, was a stretch, because the overturn of Roe in 2022 completely abrogated, annulled, wiped-out the whole deal and created a brand new ball game, meaning, the Court should have looked at the case post-Roe, and not within it, as it did.

I had made this argument in my amicus brief, but I was really a nobody in this high stakes game between the Governor, the AG, government lawyers and the Justices of the Guam Supreme Court. Yet, I am quite certain that my argument struck a chord given that one of the Justices, writing separately in his concurrence, spent several pages attacking my argument (here and here).

Well, back to the point of this post: It is Governor Lou Leon Guerrero who does not want this issue to go away as evidenced by the fact that she refuses to introduce legislation to repeal the troublesome thing. 

Apparently, she'd rather fight with Doug. 

RELATED POSTS

A Cry is Heard in Ramah, Dec. 28, 2012

Fleeing the New Herods, Dec. 23, 2011

NO DISCUSSION, NO DEBATE, NO SYNODAL SOLUTION TO TLM VS NO

By Tim Rohr

This is a specifically Catholic Church post, so, as is my practice with previous posts of this type, I only mention it on this blog and refer you to my other - if you care to read it.

https://1timothy315.blogspot.com/2025/12/no-discussion-no-debate-no-synodal.html

Merry Christmas. 

WE WAIT

By Tim Rohr

Merry Christmas, by the way, in case I forget, and especially to the millions of viewers who keep this blog high up in the algorithms. As of today, we are about 5,000 views away from SIXTEEN MILLION views since July 2013, an average of about 107,000 views per month, and that includes the many months, and sometimes years, when not much was happening. 

Those number are also exceptionally significant given that for the most part this blog has mostly posted stories relative only to the goings-on in the Archdiocese of Agana, perhaps one of the smallest Catholic dioceses in the world. And our country-counter tracks viewers from almost every country on earth. 

So why all the attention on this tiny diocese? Well, the clergy sex abuse scandal certainly played a large part, especially since it included the outing of the sordid history of our former archbishop, not to mention his ultimate "outing" from this diocese and this island by the pope himself. But such scandals are everywhere, so no reason for the rest of the world to tune specifically into Guam for that. 

Beyond the scandal, as horrible as it was, we have to thank the NCW for the popularity of this blog. The NCW is indeed all over the world. And guess what? The rest of the world has the same problems with the NCW that we have, so that's why so many viewers from everywhere tune in to what's happening in Guam. It's the NCW. And here in Guam, and specifically on this blog, we have taken on the NCW in a way few others have. 

Now before, continuing, I must, once again, distinguish the average well-meaning "member" of the NCW from its generals, who, in recent posts, I have begun to call the "Heresy Guys." But for this post, I'll stick with NCW.

Many other blogs, websites, etc. have done much to catalog and expose the heretical ways of "The Way," and, if not outright heretical, then at least the crass liberties The Way has taken with the limited permissions given it by Catholic Church authorities (such as the liberties the NCW takes with its Vatican-approved "Statutes").  

However, at JW, not only have we done much of that (in conjunction with Chuck White's work at ThouthfulCatholic.com), we - and this is what makes JW unique - have exposed and pursued the dirty political underbelly of the thing which, here in Guam, has engaged in everything from absconding with millions of dollars in church property to aiding, abetting, and ultimately hiding and protecting, some of the most sexually abusive clerics.  

Sorry, I know this is the wrong time of the year to write about this, and actually I set out to write about something else entirely, but that's what came out. However, maybe there is still a Christmas twist:

In my experience, there are many more good and sincere Catholics in our local Church than there are those who abscond, abet, hide, and protect both the bad guys and the bad teachings (and not just those by the NCW). They are just mostly quiet. Not quiet out of fear, but quiet because they don't know what to do, and they (we) trust our bishop and our priests to ultimately do the right thing...someday.

So, we wait...for three wise men, or maybe just one.

 

WHERE ARE THEY NOW?

 NCW Priests Ordained at RMS Guam 

1. Fr Alberto Salamanca.    

2. Vincenzo Acampora.    

3. Fr Michael Jucutan.    

4. Fr Jason Granado.      

5. Fr Krzysztof Szafarski.  

6. Fr Edwin Bushu.          

7. Fr Harold Colorado.          

8. Fr Julius Akinyemi.            

9. Fr Pedro Durango.             

10. Fr Antonino Caminiti.  (Deceased)

11. Fr Luis Camacho.        

12. Fr Aurelius Stoia

13. Fr Miguel Angel Pardo 

14. Fr Julio Cesar Sanchez

15. Fr Francesco Asproni

16. Fr Edivaldo Oliveira 

17. Fr Fabio Faiola.             

VATICAN: SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WITH A MINOR

 By Tim Rohr

Well, well. It's so nice to hear from The Diana again. We missed you. You did more to help us get rid of Apuron than anybody else. Had it not been for you and your blog keeping the "conversation" going for those couple of years after the Gofigan and Benavente thing cooled down (and before Apuron's victims came forward), old Brother Tony might still be running things.

But to the point. 

THE BACKSTORY TO THE LUIS CAMACHO MESS

By Tim Rohr

This started out as a short post to address the "correction," i.e. the thing Archbishop Jimenez is calling a "clarification." It's not a clarification of course, it's a correction to a very big error. But I got sidetracked on to the whole history of this thing. And while I've catalogued this history elsewhere (Orchestrated and High Drama in the AOA), both of those are multi-part and very long. So, in the interest of those not familiar with the backstory, here's the abridged version.

++++

Well there's much to say about this mess, but perhaps the first thing to say is "we told you so." Since Ryan Jimenez took on the mantle of Archbishop of Agana, we have been urging him to do something about what caused all of our problems in the first place: the "Jewish-Protestant heresy, as Bishop Athanasius Schneider terms it, that marched onto our island in 1995 and set up shop under the direction of the Nefarious Monk and his sponsor, the now de-frocked Fr. X. (I'm going to leave out some of the actual names.)  

AMAZING...BUT EXPECTED

By Tim Rohr

The Neocats never give up. They wear you down. Luis will win in the end...unless, unless...the people of this archdiocese stand up like they did against the bishop who ordained him.  

 

By the way, I don't know who this bishop is, but he nails it:

TROY'S TAKE ON THE CAMACHO AFFAIR

LINK

DIANA: "NO BIGGIE" - NINE YEARS LATER

By Tim Rohr

Whenever there is new news about something going on with the Neocats - as there was this week - there is usually a flurry of activity on old posts. Given the gravity of the Luis Camacho Affair, I really didn't expect to see any old posts near the top. However, this post from 2016 is ranked 3rd over the last 7 days. I really don't know what caused all the views. There wasn't anything in it about Luis Camacho. The comments - 9 years later - are amusing though.

https://www.junglewatch.info/2016/06/diana-no-biggie.html

For context, the post, featuring comments from The Diana, was posted the day Walter Denton spilled his guts at a street press conference in Hagatna, recounting how, as a 12 year-old altar boy in Agat, he was sodomized by then-Fr. Anthony Apuron. In hindsight, it was Walter's testimony, more than any other, which brought the canonical investigation down on Apuron and the literal Gotterdamerung which followed.

https://www.junglewatch.info/2016/06/altar-boy-sodomized-by-father-apuron.html

FR. LUIS: SCAPEGOAT

By Tim Rohr

For anyone who knows a bit about the underbelly of Neocat theology, it's hard to miss the irony of what happened to one of the Neocat's own sons: the now-former Fr. Luis Camacho.

I don't know a lot about this weird theology, but I know someone who does, and Chuck White has studied and written quite a lot about it on his blog ThoughtfulCatholic.com. 

Several years ago, Mr. White posted an article titled The Xiphias Gladius Project. As White points out, said Project is the "name of a team of Neocatechumenal academics dedicated to researching and teaching the theories of Rene Girard,  a French-born American academic." (I recommend reading the full article.)

MORE ON THE "SAGA OF LUIS CAMACHO"

The following was submitted anonymously in response to the post THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS OF THE "SAGA OF LUIS CAMACHO" 

+++++

Who is really responsible for the Abuse of a Merizo Girl?

Fr Luis admitted his guilt the day of the offense. And Archbishop Apuron accepted his resignation. Even though his seminary training was flawed, he is responsible for his actions. BUT, the lies and deceit that followed are not by Fr Luis, but of the Neo Catechumenal Way (NCW). Let’s review the reality…

THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS OF THE "SAGA OF LUIS CAMACHO"

By Jose Martinez

On December 11, 2025, Archbishop Jimenez issued a pastoral letter addressing “The Case of Luis Camacho.” While it appeared to bring closure to the charges of sexual misconduct against Luis Camacho, the letter is better understood as only the first installment in what should rightly be called “The Saga of Luis Camacho.” (thoroughly documented on JungleWatch)

AVISO. DECEMBER 11, 2025

 

PDF

NEEDED CLARIFICATION ABOUT DEFLECTION AND DENIAL.

 (Posted by Frenchie)

Some of the most powerful weapons of Satan and his fallen angels, are lies, deception and denial of his own existence. This is the main reason behind his title of the GREAT DECEIVER. As I engaged last month in denouncing the fact that two of our most well-known politicians, who are running for the office of Governor for our island while being freemasons, and advertising themselves as Catholics; I was fully aware of the type of adversity I would be facing. Several friends warned me about possible retaliations, both spiritual and temporal. A couple of priests close to me, suggested some very powerful prayers of protection, while a group of parishioners volunteered to pray the Rosary for my protection and that of Tim

CONSCIENCE IS NOT PRIVATE JUDGMENT

By Tim Rohr

The recent scuffle on this blog relative to a couple of candidates for governor who are also communion-going Catholics and Freemasons, has brought several issues to the fore, but namely the need to clarify the difference between conscience and private judgment. 

The Catholic Church authoritatively teaches that membership in Freemasonry is a "grave sin." Anonymous Freemason (in the aforementioned "scuffle") consistently argues that his membership in Freemasonry is not a grave sin because his conscience tells him so. 

ON THE IRRECONCILABILITY BETWEEN CHRISTIAN FAITH AND FREEMASONRY

By Tim Rohr

Given the current debate about Freemasonry on this blog, it may be useful to set out relatively recent official Catholic Church teaching on the matter. So we copy here the following document on the "Irreconcilability between Christian faith and Freemasonry."

REFLECTIONS A YEAR AFTER DECLARATION OF CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
Irreconcilability between Christian faith and Freemasonry

(Emphases added)

On 26 November 1983 the S. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (S.C.D.F.) published a declaration on Masonic associations (cf. AAS LXXVI [1984], 300). At a distance of little more than a year from its publication, it may be useful to outline briefly the significance of this document.

WHY CAN'T A CATHOLIC BE A FREEMASON? FR. MITCH PACWA SJ EXPLAINS

 

EXORCISMS NEEDED

By Tim Rohr

It wasn't news, but it was known by some that before Archbishop Byrnes moved into the Archbishop's house at the old Chancery, he performed an exorcism on the place. Given the evils that reportedly occurred in the Archbishop's house, including Apuron raping his own nephew (which was in the news), Archbishop Byrnes was right to be concerned about this "house of horrors" being occupied by demons let in by Apuron's acts and who knows who else and what else.

But given what we know now, after ten years, and after hundreds of lawsuits, a federal court trial, and bankruptcy, what about all the other places where these evil acts - the sexual molestation of minors, mostly boys, by many members of Guam's clergy, in otherwise sacred or at least blessed spaces (schools, churches, rectories). 

Notable places would be (in no particular order):

• The Capuchin Friary
• Santa Teresita (Mangilao)
• Our Lady of Mt. Carmel (Hagat)
• San Isidro (Maloloj)
• Nuestra Senora de la Paz y Buen Viaje (Chalan Pago)
• St. Anthony School (Tamuning)
• Fr. Duenas School (where the infamous Fr. Louis Brouillard "taught" for several years)

All of these places and probably more should be exorcised followed by many rosaries and Masses for reparation. Otherwise, "Satan, and all the evil spirits, [will continue to]prowl about [this diocese]seeking the ruin of souls," including yours, our children, and our children's children.

 

ANALYSING A TROPHY PICTURE

 Posted by Frenchie:

Last week, we posted this picture, without comment after an expose about freemasonry, and why it is wrong, and a grave sin for any Catholic to associate with freemasonry.

As the article made the rounds on our local social media, a proxy for one of the persons on this picture, asked in a condescending manner, if this was meant to be an indirect attack on his patron, an insinuation.

UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM WITH FREE MASONS

 Posted by Frenchie

The Catholic Church forbids Catholics to join Freemasonry because it is considered incompatible with the Church Faith and Doctrine.

This is a pretty strong statement, but this is the reality for Catholics since the appearance of this sectarian philosophy back in the early 18th century.

This prohibition stems from free masonry philosophical and religious tenets, which the Catholic Church views as containing errors and being in conflict with Catholicism.

This is actually a fairly diplomatic position, since as some former grand masters have revealed, one of the main goals of freemasonry is the destruction of the Church.

Here are the reasons why the Church is unequivocal about free Masonry

1) Religious indifferentism:  the Church teaches that Freemasonry promotes the idea that all religions are equally valid and that truth can be found in any faith, a concept called Religious Indifferentism. This conflicts with the Catholic belief that Jesus Christ is the one true path to salvation.

2) Rival Religion: According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Freemasonry displays the elements of a religion, including Temples, Altars, prayers, and rites and therefore becomes a rival to the Christian Faith.

3) Secrecy and oaths: freemasonry secret oaths, which can include threats of gruesome punishment for revealing its secrets, are seen as contrary to Christian Morals and public Christian Principles.

4) Conflicting Philosophy: Freemasonry emphasis on "enlightment" through reason and rationality is seen as a secular, naturalistic philosophy that is at odds with Catholic Teachings on Faith, Divine Revelation and Grace.

5) Anti-Catholic Sentiment: Historically, certain forms of Freemasonry have held Anti-Catholic views, and the Church has noted that some Masonic teachings and practices, such as viewing the Pope as an "impostor", are fundamentally opposed to Catholic doctrine.

Status of the Prohibition

The ban on Freemasonry has first been issued in 1738 and reaffirmed by numerous Popes since then.

1983 Code of Canon Law: The 1983 revision of the code of Canon Law removed specific mentions of Freemasonry, leading to some confusions about the ban's status.

Reaffirmation of the Ban: In the same year the Vatican issued a declaration clarifying that the prohibition remained in effect. The declaration stated that Catholics that joined Masonic Associations are in a state of grave sin and cannot received Holy Communion.

Continued Clarification: The Vatican has continued to reaffirm this position, most recently in a 2023 letter from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, which explicitly stated that active membership is forbidden and those who join are in a state of grave sin.

As you see, it is very clear to all but the blind, the deaf and the stupid, that being a freemason is not possible for Catholics, and that any person who does this is in a State of Grave Sin.

The question, for the Catholic Church in Guam is therefore very relevant. 

If one watches in passing the back bumpers of other cars in traffic, you will notice without too much difficulty a fairly sizeable number of Masonic symbols on said cars. I first noticed this when I first moved to Guam, and I was quite surprised to see so many Masonic signs. After consulting with several friends, I was told many people associated with Masons were hailing from the Philippines. But in observing closely, I also noticed in my parish, and in other parishes I visited occasionally that several CHamoru, some with strong clan affiliation, were obviously active in Lodges. Which leads us to this next picture.

Next: unravelling the web of lies.

HALLOWEEN: HOLIDAY OR "HELL-I-DAY?"

By Tim Rohr

On my "other"blog, THE MASS NEVER ENDS, the most read post since 2011 has been the above titled post. Given that today is October 31, and Halloween for some, I thought I'd link to it here.