Former Archbishop Anthony Apuron is guilty, I am speechless

#2

Dear curious_cath, take courage. The decision has been long expected. You see, it had been made even before the Bishop’s Synod in Vatican on sexual abuse. The guilty verdict was released only now so that the emotions have time to cool.

In the La Stampa article you brought here, Fr. Anthony Apuron seems to launch a counterattack against his accusers, despite the Papal decision. He says, I quote:

“This climate – all too evident in local newspapers - which has hindered the work of the Court of First Instance, testifies to the presence of a pressure group that has planned to destroy me, and that has made itself clearly known to the authorities in Rome. Several people told me - with great pain and fear and asking me not to reveal their names - that they had been invited to make accusations against me, even behind an offer of money,” the prelate points out."

Wow, wow, what pressure group?! Was it not because of the sexual abuses he had committed in the past? Is Fr. Apuron truly accusing people for paying money for testifying against him and bringing about his demise? This seems too far-fetched tp me.

0 Likes

#3

I know you have been an ardent defender of his for quite some time now. I am sure this is very hard for you to bear. I take no joy in seeing this happen to anyone but I have been of the opinion that the correct decision was made here. There is a very serious problem in the Church and little resolve to confront it head on. Until that is done, this is going to continue to weaken the Church and souls will be lost.

1 Like

#4

I have been skeptical about the tactics of those who attacked the Archbishop. He might have been guilty or not, in a distant past when most of us haven’t been born yet, now I don’t know. But this thing goes well beyond the person. It was a war against the church and brought down the whole archdiocese.

From the beginning it was a major operation of a group of rednecks who abused their access to politics. They have never hid their attitude that drove them to manufacture laws against the Catholic Church. Now, the archdiocese is bankrupt, waiting for sentences and demands for monetary compensation on the scale of 10 and 10 million dollars from the court.

Who can say this is a happy end?

0 Likes

#5

I have to say that I am entirely unfamiliar with the case or the evidence for or against guilt. But I am always somewhat mystified that crimes are not reported until 30 or 40 years after the fact. How can a good investigation possibly be made?

0 Likes

#6

If Mr. Apuron is really guilty, he belongs in jail.

0 Likes

#7

My understanding is that he only faces civil and not criminal trial.

0 Likes

#8

Here-I-am-Lord . . .

My understanding is that he only faces civil and not criminal trial.

You are probably right on this.

But he OUGHT to be facing a criminal trial at the Vatican.

And since he was ALREADY found guilty in some sort of Vatican trial (which is WHY they removed him as Guam’s Archbishop) have him report to the Vatican for jailing there.

I am sure the Swiss Guard would have jail facilities.

As it stands, the Vatican didn’t even remove his priestly faculties!

From Apuron . . . .

"I totally submit to the judgment of the Holy Father as
I thank him for allowing me to continue serving as a priest
and archbishop
without insignia.

0 Likes

#9

Why is this so far-fetched to you?

0 Likes

#10

Gosh, are you making this up? Archbishop Apuron was convicted for sexual abuse of minors by the first ever Canonical Trial against a high ranking clergy at a Vatican Tribunal. What else are you dreaming of?

If this is conspiracy as the former disgraced Archbishop says, then Pope Francis must be part of that anti-Apuron conspiracy! :wink: He did not only confirm the guilty verdict but even made the sanctions more severe!

0 Likes

#11

Here-I-am-Lord . . .

Archbishop Apuron was convicted for sexual abuse of minors by the first ever Canonical Trial against a high ranking clergy at a Vatican Tribunal. What else are you dreaming of?

Actually I am also dreaming of you quoting me accurately so we can have an actual discussion.

0 Likes

#12

Less than 50% of the charges made against Archbishop Apuron was confiirmed.

“Sources close to the archbishop told CNA that Apuron was charged with more than five canonical delicts at first instance, and convicted of only two.”

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/04/04/analysis-gregory-apuron-zero-tolerance-and-pontifical-secrets/

There is defnitely an element of conspiracy involved when more than 50% of the accusations against an Archbishop are deemed baseless.

0 Likes

#13

Yeah, but the same thing means that 40% of the accusations are credible! Doesn’t this disturb you about the former Archbishop? There was a very serious reason for his conviction!

0 Likes

#14

Here-I-am-Lord. Are we going to have the discussion or aren’t we?

I mentioned Archbishop Apuron . . .

. . . was ALREADY found guilty in some sort of Vatican trial (which is WHY they removed him as Guam’s Archbishop) . . .

(Here it is.)

.

You misquoted me here saying . . .

Gosh, are you making this up? Archbishop Apuron was convicted for sexual abuse of minors by the first ever Canonical Trial against a high ranking clergy at a Vatican Tribunal. . . .

I asked in my reply that you would address what I said, and not what you manufactured.
(". . . I am also dreaming of you quoting me accurately so we can have an actual discussion.")

.

You also said in the same post here (to curious_cath:) that Pope Francis . . .

. . . did not only confirm the guilty verdict but even made the sanctions more severe!

(Which is what I just implied when you accused me of “dreaming” after misquoting me.)

What gives?
What point were you trying to make with my post?

I am still open and willing to have the discussion (as I said here).

0 Likes

#15

Oh, come on, dear Cathoholic, you wanted the convicted Archbishop, now a Bishop only, to be incarcerated at the Vatican and having Swiss Guards guarding him. How come?

0 Likes

#16

Here-I-am-Lord . . .

Oh, come on, dear Cathoholic, you wanted the convicted Archbishop, now a Bishop only, to be incarcerated at the Vatican and having Swiss Guards guarding him. How come?

Well I thought I already said “how come”.

Cathoholic . . .

If Mr. Apuron is really guilty, he belongs in jail.

(Here it is again.)

Apuron has had charges in court, and he has been found guilty.

The Vatican (IN SOME SENSE) has also found Apuron “guilty”. At least “guilty” enough to remove him from his archbishop’s position.

If Apuron is innocent, this was an injustice.
If Apuron is guilty, mere removal as archbishop does not go far enough.

0 Likes

#17

Which court? It was a canonical trial at Vatican. Not a civil court. The cannical trial follows canon law, not civil law. Pope Francis imposed a relatively mild sanction because the conviction was not based on sexual abuses wildly publicized in the media. Those accusations were proved to be untrue and exaggerated. Archbishop Apuron got his mild sanctions for delicts against the Sixth Commandment.

0 Likes

#18

curious_cath . . .

Archbishop Apuron got his mild sanctions for delicts against the Sixth Commandment.

Just what “delicts” do you think he committed?
And “why” do you think that?

0 Likes

#19

Archbishop Apuron got his mild sanctions for delicts against the Sixth Commandment.

OK,

i will start off by saying I have no idea if the accusations are true or not.
But lets not obscure what is known.

First you left off the last part of the sentence, in bold below…
guilty of delicts against the Sixth Commandment with minors

I know he was accused of raping at least one alter boy, Walter Denton.
Many others also accused him.
Do you know which cases were found not worthy of belief?

Second, it does not mater if some of the claims were untrue. If he sexually abused 2 altar boys and continued to deny it, that would be enough.

I know he angered same-sex “marriage” advocates. I know they can try to bring about the downfall of good Catholic priests and Bishops, especially with these types of allegations. I have no way of knowing if that is what happened in this case.

But lets be clear. True or false, he was accused of sexually abusing minors.

0 Likes

#20

I did not deny the possibility. Altough delict and abuse are two distinct words. What I say is that some accusations, like that of Denton’s, were so far-fetched that those accusations did not fly by any means. Archbishop Apuron could have had milder accusations that we don’t know of. It is inconceivable that he would have been kept a Bishop if he did something serious, as his known accusers claim.

Pope Francis told reporters, that the evidence in Apuron’s case was clear. I don’t think that people accusing him with 40-50 years old crimes would have been able to present “clear evidence” of wrongdoing.

0 Likes

#21

I would not try to explain away sexual abuse of minors, especially if the evidence was clear!

0 Likes

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.